asked the Secretary of State for War what rates of pay have been agreed for the principal categories of Italian skilled workers at present employed on contracts in Kenya; and what rates are paid to Africans for comparable work.

I will, with permission, circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT a table showing the rates of pay for Italian skilled workers employed by the War Department in Kenya. As regards the second part of the Question, no skilled African tradesmen are available for the work to be done by the Italians.

asked the Secretary of State for War what is the strength of the Nigerian Regiment and the East African Regiment, respectively; and whether these two regiments form part of a divisional or other composite force.

As regards the second regiment mentioned, the noble Lord is presumably thinking of the King's African Rifles. It is not the practice to disclose the strength or composition of particular units or formations.

Is it not possible, without doing anything to disaccord with security, to give some indication of the size of the very important forces in Africa, in view of the fact that it was always done before the war, and even up to 1939?

I should not think so at present.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he has approved the form used by officers of the Royal Engineers attached to the Second British Infantry Division in which they have to state whether men under their command, whom they are recommending for promotion, are married to women of alien origin, and if they have, or have not, applied to marry an ex-enemy national.

This was a form approved locally for use by one particular unit. The item referred to in the Question is being removed from the form.

While thanking my right hon. Friend for that answer, may I ask is he aware that in the case of which I have sent him particulars the fact that a British sergeant was married to an ex-enemy national was allowed to interfere with his promotion, and will he look into this case and any other cases?

I am informed that no man in this unit has been refused promotion on the ground of having married an alien.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that a copy of the document in question has been sent to him and this question as to whether or not the man is married to an enemy alien is included in the form? For what object is it included but to weigh against the man's recommendation for promotion?

There may have been some other reason.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he is satisfied that after the period of initial training the schedule of training and duties for National Service personnel is sufficient to keep them reasonably busy, and that the present scale of recreational and educational facilities is adequate.

The training and duties to be carried out by National Service men should keep them fully occupied; adequate facilities exist for education and for recreation during leisure hours.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there are many instances of young men in National Service who feel they are not fully occupied and are subject to a great feeling of frustration? Will he look into this to see whether these facilities can be improved?

If my hon. Friend can give me some details of any man not getting enough to do, I will certainly try to find him sufficient to do.

Is the Minister aware that Captain Liddell Hart recently expressed the view that the Army is too large, and will he take this into consideration and advise the Government accordingly?

The gentleman referred to is not original, because my hon. Friend has held those views for many years.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he will make a statement about the loss of two Churchill tanks in Haifa on 29th June.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to the hon. and gallant Member for Petersfield (Sir G. Jeffreys) on Tuesday last.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that last Tuesday he expressly reserved the question of the conduct of the two sentries there, and since then an allegation has been made that they were suborned and deserted? In these circumstances, will he not do all he can to clear up the position as quickly as possible?

I have made very careful inquiries about where they are, but so far I cannot get any information.

Has the usual court of inquiry into the loss of or damage to equipment been held and, if so, what was the result?

If there are inquiries, and I have a report, I shall know a little more about it.

Would the right hon. Gentleman find out whether there is any truth in the statement, which has been widely made, that these two tanks and their drivers now form part of the Israelite Army?

It is alleged that they were taken into possession by members of the Israelite Army, but I have no other information.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he has now abandoned his proposal to acquire additional land and retain part of the present training area in the proposed North York Moors National Park.

This proposal has not been abandoned. It was the subject of a public local inquiry on 14th April, 1948, the report of which is under consideration. In the circumstances I do not think that it would be desirable for me to say anything further at this stage.

When will my right hon. Friend be able to announce his abandonment of this proposal? As a result of his lunchtime conversation with the Minister of Town and Country Planning, has my right hon. Friend been persuaded that it is about time he got out of this area?

There is considerable fluidity about this problem, and it has not been liquidated as a result of the lunch.

Without committing the Minister to the main proposal, may I ask him whether he has considered the alternative area proposed by the Standing Committee of the North Riding of Yorkshire?

I cannot say that I have specifically considered the suggested alternative, but I would remind the hon. Gentleman that the question of the acquisition of land for battle training is very complex and intricate.

May I ask the Minister of Town and Country Planning whether he was able to bring his influence to bear on the Secretary of State for War? Can I have an answer?

Certainly not.

Am I not entitled, Mr. Speaker, to have a simple answer to a simple question?

I understand that it is not correct to ask one Minister to influence another, because the Government is one and indivisible.

My hon. Friend the Member for Ipswich (Mr. Stokes) is part of the one and indivisible.

asked the Secretary of State for War why Frau Martha Wolff or her gardener have been prevented from working the garden of the requisitioned house Klein-Flottbeckerweg 37, Othmarschen, whereas a B.A.O.R. ordinance expressly allows the owner of a requisitioned house to work the garden, provided the occupant receives part of the produce.

I am not aware of any ordinance such as is suggested in the Question. The house referred to is occupied by an officer who cultivates the whole of the garden himself. This is in accordance with the normal requisitioning procedure.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that until January or February of this year this house was occupied, and that the family were allowed to have the garden? Since there has been a change of occupant this woman has been chased off it. Will he acquaint himself with C.C.G. instructions, which are different from Army instructions, and which lay down that the owner may cultivate the garden and that the occupier may get some of the produce?

This woman has three other gardens in Hamburg from which she obtains produce.

I was not aware of that.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether the courts martial in connection with the death of two Germans at Bad Nenndorf Civil Interrogation Centre and the maltreatment of others have yet been completed; and with what result.

Two courts martial have been held to date. The first was on an interrogation officer of the camp who was acquitted on all charges. The second was on the medical officer of the camp. He was charged with manslaughter, but was acquitted on this charge. He was, however, convicted on several charges of negligence under Section 40 of the Army Act, and was sentenced to be dismissed. The finding and sentence have, however, not yet been confirmed. A third court martial, on the commandant of the camp, is still in progress.

When the court martial on the commandant has been completed, will my right hon. Friend see that a comprehensive public statement is made about this deplorable affair?

If I am asked a Question when that happens, I will answer it.

asked the Secretary of State for War what is the purpose of the visit to the U.S.A. of Major-General C. H. H. Vulliamy, Director of Signals at the War Office.

The Director of Signals is visiting the United States of America at the invitation of the United States Department of the Army. It is intended that he should visit American signal units and establishments, with a view to gaining first-hand knowledge of the organisation, operations and procedures of the Corps of Signals, United States Army.

Would it be possible for the right hon. Gentleman to give the House a review now of the outcome of the adventures of this procession of high-ranking officers who have gone to America, and to which I have drawn his attention in the past?

I cannot imagine that it can do either the United States or the United Kingdom any harm to have these visits.

Is it not quite unusual, Mr. Speaker, for hon. Members of this House to criticise, or otherwise comment on the executive functions which officers of the Services carry out?

I quite agree that it is unusual, but perhaps these constant criticisms do not carry much weight.

On a point of Order. Do I understand from what you have just said, Sir, that it is assumed that there was some criticism involved in my Question? Upon my word, none was intended. If you have the feeling that every Question I ask about an officer of this sort is meant to be a criticism of that officer then, with the utmost respect, I suggest that your view is quite unfounded.

The hon. Member may think that, but he must be aware that in all these Questions there is some kind of innuendo which, after all, is not right. Imputations and innuendoes are not in Order in asking supplementary questions, and, therefore, I made the remark that I did.

Is the Minister aware that at one time I was one of Major-General Vulliamy's most efficient deputies, and that I am in a position to know that this distinguished and experienced officer can do more good in six weeks in the United States, in matters of technical research, contacts and friendly liaison with America, than the hon. Member for Finsbury (Mr. Platts-Mills) could do in six years?

I would not dare to quarrel with the hon. and gallant Member's appraisement either of himself or Major-General Vulliamy.

Have any similar invitations been received by British officers from Moscow?

If a Question is put down on that point, I will try to answer it.

Is it not rather strange that a Socialist Government should be sending so many of its military representatives to America to get instruction from the most ruthless capitalist Government which the world has ever seen?

Is it not equally strange that a Socialist Government in Britain should be practically dependent on the capitalist Government of America to keep going from day to day?

After this, I think we had better get on.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he is aware that a circular, issued by the proprietors of the Broome Park Hotel, near Canterbury, contains a statement derogatory to the Army, in that it charges members of it with wilful damage and theft; and if he proposes to prosecute the proprietors of the hotel and compel them to withdraw the circular.

The hon. Member has been good enough to send me a copy of the passage in the circular to which he refers. The offensive statement derogatory to the Army is in general terms, and contains no allegations against particular individuals. I need do no more than point out that if it had not been for the gallant fight put up by the Army and the other Services in the war to defend this country from invasion, the proprietors of the hotel would doubtless not now have been in possession of it at all.

asked the Secretary of State for War if the Committee of Inquiry set up by him under the chairmanship of Mr. Justice Lewis to inquire into the court martial system has yet reported; and if he will publish the report and take steps to implement it.

asked the Secretary of State for War when the report of the Court Martial Committee will be published.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether the findings of the Lewis Committee on Court Martial Reform will be made public in the near future.

I would refer the hon. Members to the reply given to my hon. Friend the Member for Bosworth (Mr. A. Allen) on 20th April last. I can see no prospect of the report being made available to hon. Members this Session.

Will my right hon. Friend see whether one of the recommendations in that report is that some system of appeal from courts martial should be set up? Such appeals are desirable in the public interest. What steps is my right hon. Friend taking to implement such a recommendation if there be one?

When the recommendations are examined, I shall see how far it is possible to reconcile them with what my hon. and learned Friend has suggested.

As the Minister has had the report in his possession since 20th April, what is the reason for the delay in publication?

This is a very complex matter; it affects several Service Departments and also the Legal Department under the Crown. The matter has to be very carefully examined. If it were a simple matter, I should be able to make a simple statement.

Is there any reason why hon. Members should not be able to examine the report while the consequences of the report are examined by the War Office?

There is every reason why hon. Members should defer consideration at any rate until the Departments concerned have been able to conduct a further examination.

Does the right hon. Gentleman intend to implement the report before the House sees it, or is he going to delay its implementation?

I will not seek to do that. Hon. Members will be entitled to a full statement on the matter, but adequate time must be given to us to examine the problem ourselves.

asked the Secretary of State for War when Cambridge, Connaught and Victoria blocks in Colchester barracks were last used for the accommodation of soldiers' families; to what use these blocks are at present respectively being put; and what is the intention of his Department with regard to the future use of these blocks.

These blocks in Colchester barracks were last used for the accommodation of soldiers' families in 1939, when they were condemned as unfit for married quarters. Cambridge block is now unused and derelict. Connaught block is now used for a dental centre and for administrative offices. Victoria block is not inhabited but is used for training in fire fighting. It has not yet been settled what is to be done with these blocks ultimately.

Will the Minister look into the possibility of these blocks being reconditioned?

I have given a great deal of attention to this matter of accommodation for serving men and officers, but some of the blocks in our possession are not worth reconditioning.

asked the Secretary of State for War (1) how many officers and men of Port Operating Section, Royal Engineers, were employed in the recent dock strike;

(2) how many officers and men of Port Operating Units stationed in England were employed in the recent dock strike.

It is not the practice to give information of the kind asked for in these Questions.

While respecting the right hon. Gentleman's desire to maintain security, may I ask is it not a fact that these units were not in any way employed during the recent strike, and would it not have been an ideal opportunity for testing their efficiency, which is the sole purpose of their existence?

We have not any doubt about their efficiency, but it is undesirable to give the numbers of men operating in a particular area.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he has yet come to a decision in the case of Mr. A. E. Jenner, of 421, Gallowgate, Glasgow, which has been before him since 5th March last.

A decision cannot yet be given in this case as further inquiries still have to be made. Those made so far have not substantiated Mr. Jenner's claim.

asked the Secretary of State for War the grounds on which disciplinary action has been or is proposed to be taken against a civil servant, Mr. F. Tuck.

This civil servant made a complaint to the hon. and learned Member about the operation of the promotion rules in the War Department, as a result of which he had been replaced by a junior, and in his own view his prospects of promotion had accordingly been prejudiced.

It is a firmly established rule, and one well understood throughout the Civil Service, that promotion in the Service must neither depend, nor even appear to depend, upon influence brought to bear from outside the Service. This rule is embodied in the regulations which govern the administration of War Department civilian staff. In these regulations it is laid down that

"any attempt on the part of an employee to secure promotion by bringing any indirect influence to bear in his support will be regarded as an admission that the case is not deserving of consideration on its merits, and will be treated as an offence against discipline."

In seeking the hon. and learned Member's support for his claim, this civil servant has committed a disciplinary offence. It is for this reason that he is being reprimanded.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this civil servant did not write seeking to secure promotion, but, as the letter which I received from the Financial Secretary to the War Office says, complaining that he had to relinquish that promotion? In those circumstances will the right hon. Gentleman reconsider the matter?

If the person concerned wrote about relinquishing his promotion, obviously he had the same object in view, and all that I have to say is that there is a recognised procedure for dealing with these matters. There is the Whitley Council, and if the person referred to had any grievance he could have put the matter before his side of the Whitley Council for consideration.

Is the right hon. Gentleman complaining because this civil servant wrote to his Member of Parliament?

I am most certainly complaining that this civil servant wrote to a Member of Parliament seeking the influence of the Member of Parliament in connection with his promotion.

Is it not a fact that a man in uniform can write to his Member of Parliament on any subject, and would the same action have been taken against this man had he been a soldier?

It is well understood that a soldier has a right to write to his Member of Parliament and state his grievance, if he has one, but in the case of the serving man he has not got either trade unions or a Whitley Council at his disposal.

This is very important, and I merely put this question for information: Is the right hon. Gentleman laying it down as a definite statement of principle that no civil servant is able to write to a Member of Parliament about his position and conditions of employment?

I most certainly am not, but what I am saying is that no civil servant should write to a Member of Parliament seeking to use the influence of a Member of Parliament in a matter of promotion.

While recognising and fully endorsing what the Minister has said about the impropriety of an individual civil servant seeking to secure promotion by outside influence—a point upon which all civil servants' trade unions are utterly at one with the Government—may I ask the Secretary of State for War two questions: whether he will distinguish sharply between a letter from an individual civil servant seeking outside help to get promotion and a letter from a civil servant to any Member of Parliament voicing grievances of the public service; and, secondly, will he distinguish between the effort to secure promotion and to avoid de-motion, because I understand that that may be involved in this case?

I have already made the distinction.

While I recognise that it would be a wrong thing to seek to secure promotion by means of writing to a Member of Parliament, in view of the unsatisfactory reply to the Question, and also because this civil servant did not seek promotion, I beg to give notice that I shall raise the matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Secretary of State for War what reports have been submitted to him by the Army Manpower Committee since May 1947; and which of the recommendations made are now being implemented.

The Army Manpower Committee have submitted to me two written reports, the report which I mentioned in reply to a Question by my hon. Friend the Member for Stafford (Mr. Swingler) on 20th January and a report on ordnance installations. The chairman visits me from time to time and reports progress, and my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State attends the meetings of the Committee. The recommendations of the Committee are dealt with by normal departmental action, and have covered the results of their examination of nearly all the Army's services. It would be quite impracticable to describe in answer to a Parliamentary Question those recommendations which are being implemented. For example, in the case of the ordnance investigations alone, although the present organisation was found to be generally sound, several hundred recommendations were made and are being implemented.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware of the state of affairs at Ludshott Common and Fullers Vale near Headley, Hampshire, where, owing to the continuous use of the slopes by tracked vehicles, the vegetation has been destroyed and the soil consolidated, so that after heavy rain the water rushes down into the valley causing damage to houses, gardens and roads; and why, after admitting liability for damage and after carrying out works, which have been only partially effective, the War Office now declines to take any further steps to mitigate the damage caused.

I am aware of the position in this area. My Department has spent some thousands of pounds in measures to prevent flooding and all claims for compensation for damage to private property caused by flooding have been settled at a cost of little over £100. The Department is negotiating a claim for the reinstatement of Ludshott Common with the National Trust, who are the owners. The risk of flooding is being further reduced by the return of vegetation on the Common.

Is the Secretary of State aware that the surface of these slopes has become practically as hard as asphalt; that vegetable growth is so slow that it is almost imperceptible; that it is very small comfort to persons suffering inconvenience and damage to be told that this loss is not likely to occur as frequently in the future as it has in the past, and will he not reconsider the matter?

We recognise that some inconvenience has been caused to pedestrians in this neighbourhood, but we are doing all that we can to reduce that inconvenience.

Is the Secretary of State aware that inconvenience has been caused not only to pedestrians but to others, that houses have been flooded in certain instances, and that gardens have practically been washed away?

This matter is still under investigation and we are not disposing of it because we have replied to a Parliamentary Question.

asked the Secretary of State for War what obligation rests on demobilised men, other than Regular Reservists, to present, themselves for further service if mobilisation should be rendered necessary by any fresh emergency; and whether he will cause the position and obligations of such men to be made perfectly clear.

It should be clearly understood that all officers and men who have left the Army under the release scheme are still members of the Reserve. Their liability to recall will continue until the emergency is declared to be at an end. This information is given to each officer and man on the last page of his release book.

Would the Secretary of State make this clear in a further order, so that it will be clearly understood by all personnel concerned, because a great many of them think that they are demobilised for good and that there is no question of their recall?

I should imagine that the answer I have given, which is very specific, will have made the matter clear.

Has a man or an officer to get permission to leave the country if he is on the Reserve?

I cannot reply to that question offhand.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether graves of personnel killed in France and buried in churchyards or other recognised burying grounds are moved to military cemeteries without reference to the next-of-kin or relations; and whether he will cause full and up-to-date information as to any action taken or proposed regarding such graves and as to the nature and material of the headstones to be invariably conveyed to the next-of-kin.

It is seldom necessary to move graves from a churchyard or other recognised burial ground into a military cemetery. When it is necessary the next-of-kin are now always informed beforehand of the move and the reasons for it. The Imperial War Graves Commission will provide headstones which will in North-West Europe be of Portland stone. The Commission are responsible for the permanent maintenance of all war graves both in military cemeteries and in other recognised burial grounds. The Commission consult the next-of-kin in advance about the inscriptions on headstones.

Is the Secretary of State aware that there have been cases in which the next-of-kin have not been informed about the moving, of graves in the manner he has stated? If I send him a specific instance, will he reconsider the matter?

Certainly I will.

The Question refers only to France. Are we to understand that the right hon. Gentleman's answer covers all North-West Europe as well?

I believe it does, but the difficulties vary on the Continent.

Can my right hon. Friend say whether the "full and up-to-date information" referred to in the Question includes photographs of the new graves, and whether these photographs are now being sent reasonably quickly, because there has been a good deal of delay?

We are sending photographs, but I am bound to say that I am a little reluctant to have photographs sent unless the graves are in a very satisfactory condition.

asked the Secretary of State for War what is the estimated value of military stores which it was necessary either to destroy or to leave behind in Palestine.

It is not possible to give any estimate of the value of the comparatively small amount of military stores which it was necessary to destroy or abandon in Palestine.

asked the Minister of Town and Country Planning whether he is aware of the proposal to erect wireless stations for the use of the police on Bulbarrow and Eggardon Hills, Dorset; and what action he proposes to take in this matter, having regard to the amenities of the county and the objections raised to the proposal by the Dorset Joint Planning Committee.

Yes, Sir, as to Eggardon Hill; possible alternative sites are under consideration and no formal application for permission has therefore yet been made to the local planning authority. As to Bulbarrow Hill, this is at present held on requisition by the Air Ministry; the permanent disposal of the site and buildings on relinquishment will be considered nearer the time. There is, however, a proposal that they should make available to the Dorset Police part of the existing station. This proposal is still under consideration.

May I ask the Minister how long it is expected to be before the site on Bulbarrow will be derequisitioned?

That is not a question for me.

For what purpose should the Dorset Police want to use a wireless station in this loveliest of lovely countryside?

asked the Minister of Town and Country Planning whether the findings of the public local inquiry held on 16th June in regard to the proposal to establish an anti-tank artillery range near Bamburgh and Holy Island have now been considered by him; and whether he will now make a statement in the light of its findings.

I have not yet received the report on this public local inquiry, but the decision of the Government will be announced as soon as possible after its receipt.

asked the Minister of Town and Country Planning from whom should the appropriate claim form be obtained when making an application for compensation for loss of development rights under the Town and Country Planning Act, 1947.

The claim form, known as S. 1, may, except in the London County Council area, be obtained from the office of any county council or borough, urban district or rural district council. In the London County Council area it may be obtained from County Hall, or, in the City of London from the Town Clerk's Office. It is also available at the various offices of the Central Land Board.

Are supplies available yet at all these places?

So far as I know, yes, Sir.

In view of the way in which people have been penalised under the War Damage Acts by failure to observe the time limits, will the right hon. Gentleman ensure that before this time limit is reached the greatest attention will be paid to the publicising of the date, either by broadcasting or by other means, so that further difficulties will not be created?

Without commenting on the question of the War Damage Commission, I can only say that everything we possibly can do to bring this to the notice of the public is being done and will be done.

asked the Minister of Town and Country Planning whether he is yet in a position to announce the decision of the Government in regard to the future of the Stanford and Purbeck training areas.

I expect to be able to make a statement after Questions on Monday next. In the meanwhile I shall be visiting the areas for discussions with representatives of the interests concerned.

Can my right hon. Friend say that the statement will convey the final decision of the Government about these battle training areas?

Yes, Sir.

Can I offer the right hon. Gentleman any entertainment in my constituency in the coming few days?

I should like to know the nature of the entertainment before I reply.

asked the Minister of National Insurance what arrangements are being made to ensure the continuation after the approved day of the work being carried out in Devon under the auspices of the Devon Joint Vagrancy Committee for the relief of casuals in reception centres and for their rehabilitation.

The National Assistance Board, who are now responsible for the relief of casuals, have made arrangements with the local authorities concerned for reception centres to be maintained at Barnstaple, Exeter and Plymouth. With the help of authorities and of the Ministry of Labour and National Service, the Board intend to continue the good work which has already been done by joint vagrancy committees in placing casuals in employment and otherwise persuading them to adopt a more settled way of life, and I am able to inform the hon. Member that the new reception centre at Plymouth is already showing good results in placing men in work.

As the local authorities concerned have done useful pioneer work, as the Minister has indicated, will he ensure that that experience is made full use of and that all possible emphasis will be put on rehabilitation rather than on mere relief?

The Board are very conscious of that, and that is their desire. In fact, since the new reception centre was opened at Plymouth on 7th June, out of the 59 men admitted, 24 have already been placed in work.

Can the Minister tell us whether this joint vagrancy committee, when dealing with vagrants, will make certain to get rid of the vermin?

asked the Minister of National Insurance whether he is aware that outworkers in the gloving industry are classed as self-employed; and whether, as this operates as an undue burden upon them, he will amend the regulations to enable them to be classed as employees.

Outworkers are not employed under a contract of service but under a contract for services and therefore fall into the class of self-employed persons under the Act. There is power to make regulations to modify the nomal classification in particular cases, but the National Insurance Advisory Committee recommended that outworkers were properly insurable as self-employed persons and, having regard to the difficulties of administering unemployment benefit in their case, should not be transferred by regulation to the employed class. I have accepted the Committee's view. An out-worker whose total income is less than £104 a year will be able to claim exception from liability to contribute but may, if he wishes, contribute as though he were a non-employed person. Many out-workers are married women who need not contribute whatever their earnings or income.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that until the new Act came into force the employers paid their share of the contribution, as did the employees, and that by his ruling now the employees' rate of weekly contribution will go from 1s. 10d. to 6s. 2d. a week? Is this not a very undue burden on them, and will the right hon. Gentleman reconsider the matter?

It is a very difficult matter. Perhaps I might point out that these outworkers were never covered for unemployment insurance, and, that is what makes the difficulty now. I invited the National Insurance Advisory Committee to look carefully into this matter to see whether it would be possible to bring these people into Class I, as we did with the share fishermen, by making suitable arrangements about unemployment benefit. The Committee were satisfied that we could not do that, and because of that they made their recommendation, which I felt compelled to accept.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the great need for the encouragement of women to go into industry, and is he aware that this is hardly encouraging to women, who are in this case practically the whole of the outworkers, to go into that industry?

These women work at home and do not go into the industry. However, I appreciate the point which has been put. If there had been any possible way, or if any way is discovered, by which we could admit them into Class I, while avoiding the obvious abuse of the Unemployment Fund which is possible, I would gladly reconsider the matter.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that many disabled persons are in this category and that serious hardship is being caused to them by this increase of contribution?

There would be an increased contribution into whichever class they came. That is part of the National Insurance Act. Let me put it quite frankly—the National Insurance Advisory Committee, who have a very wide experience in this matter, have definitely recommended that they cannot think of any practical arrangement which could be made to admit outworkers as Class I. We were able to do that in the case of the share fishermen, and if it were possible here I would be glad to do it, but after careful consideration the Advisory Committee cannot recommend it.

Are we to understand from the Minister's reply that he is prepared to reconsider this grading? It is a very important matter because I understand the Government are trying to encourage work done in cottage homes for the benefit of the community, and is it not a fact that it will have an increasing effect on a large number of people working in rural areas?

I said I would be prepared to reconsider it if a practical scheme could be devised. So far none has been devised, and that is why I have had to accept the recommendation of the Committee.

asked the Minister of National Insurance if he will arrange for receipts to be given to those who hand in their National Health cards.

I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the reply given on 9th July to the question on the same subject by the hon. Member for Tiverton (Mr. Amory), a copy of which I am sending him.

asked the Minister of National Insurance whether the Departmental Committee appointed in June, 1947, to advise him on the exercise of his powers relating to industrial diseases under the National Insurance (Industrial Injuries) Act, 1946, has yet submitted its report; and whether he will publish such a report together with the evidence submitted to the committee.

I have not yet received the report of the Committee to which the hon. Member refers. When I receive it I will consider the question of publication, but it is not usual to publish the evidence submitted to committees of this nature.

As the Minister has had perforce to issue regulations to make the Act workable before receiving the report of the Dale Committee, would he consider again the form of the regulations when he has received the report, particularly with regard to the question of whether pneumoconiosis and silicosis, and other comparable diseases, should not be treated on the same footing as other industrial diseases?

When I announced the setting up of a committee, I said that when the report was available I would consider it with its full implications upon this type of industrial diseases.

asked the Minister of National Insurance whether he will take powers to amend the National Insurance Act so as to end the anomaly in the case of a man with children of a first marriage who lives with another woman and has further children by her, whereby the children are assessed separately for the purpose of family allowances, with the result that within the single family there are two first children.

No, Sir. I am not prepared to introduce amending legislation for the purposes suggested by the hon. Member.

As the effect of this anomaly is that where there are four babies in one family, born of two separate mothers, they only get the benefit for two children whereas, where they are the same family born of one mother and two separate fathers they get the benefit for three children, will the Minister not recognise that this is quite a silly anomaly?

I appreciate that there is an anomaly, but this is a very controversial matter, and the question has been considered by this House quite recently. My reply is that I am not prepared to consider amending legislation.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he has now reached a decision regarding the future use of the Training Centre at Radcliffe as a Remploy factory.

Yes, Sir. It has now been decided that part of the Government Training Centre at Radcliffe should be made available for a Remploy factory.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the fact that it has taken six months of effort on the part of the hon. Member for Bury (Mr. W. Fletcher) and myself to obtain this concession will not diminish the pleasure felt in the area as a result of it? Will he allow us to keep an open mind as to whether or not it goes far enough, and perhaps to raise the matter later?

I can assure my hon. Friend that I share the pleasure with him, because there have been considerable difficulties to overcome, but I am hoping that we shall be able to get this moving now in a couple of months.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the pleasure will be in exact relationship to the amount of the factory space that is being made available, and whether it is adequate for the purpose or not?

asked the Minister of Labour what age restrictions are imposed on European voluntary workers entering this country; and in the case of men who become agricultural workers, if they are allowed to leave agriculture and take up other work on attaining the age of fifty.

The upper age limit for admission is normally 50 but some older men have been accepted. European voluntary workers, of whatever age, are not free to change from one employment to another without permission. I am having inquiries made into the case about which the hon. and gallant Member has sent me particulars and will write to him.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether there is any limit to the total number of European voluntary workers that he can introduce into this country?

There is no limitation of the actual number of workers, looking at it from that angle; the number is limited by the requirement there is for them.

In view of the fact that a good many farmers in my constituency and in other constituencies would like to bring back to this country German ex-prisoner workers, will he be able to make this easier to do?

That is rather a different question. It deals with prisoners of war, and I am dealing with European voluntary workers at the moment.

asked the Minister of Labour if he is aware that subject to medical fitness the whole family of Mr. Huryn, of Austria, was accepted for employment in England under the European voluntary workers scheme in August, 1947, and that only one of the family has been allowed to travel to England, and why the rest of the family have not been allowed to travel in accordance with the scheme.

Three adult sons of this family have been in this country for some time. The transfer of the rest of the family consisting of the father and mother and a child has been delayed because of the shortage of family accommodation, but I am hopeful that it will be possible to bring them here at an early date.

asked the Minister of Labour if he is aware that the Musicians' Union have given notice that on 1st August next it is their intention to withdraw all musicians from the B.B.C. with the exception of the ten house bands; and if he will make a full statement on the position, indicating who is responsible for the negotiations which have taken place between the Corporation and the union; and what steps have been taken in regard to arbitration.

Yes, Sir. I am informed that notice has been given to the B.B.C. by the Musicians' Union. The position, as I understand it, is that this dispute concerns the minimum rates to be paid to certain musicians taking part in broadcasts, a considerable proportion of whom are not directly employed by the B.B.C. These minimum rates have been negotiated in the past between the B.B.C. and the Musicians' Union and the negotiations that have recently taken place are the responsibility of the parties concerned. No steps have been taken in regard to arbitration. The parties are aware that the services of my Department are available to them.

Could my right hon. Friend give consideration to bringing his influence to bear upon the B.B.C. to encourage them to set up suitable machinery to get this sort of problem cleared up? Does he not recognise that this is one further instance which shows that adequate machinery is not available?

My hon. Friend is not correctly informed. In the first place, it must be borne in mind that this is not in the normal run of industrial negotiations because, in this matter, the B.B.C. is not mainly the employer, but merely the contractor between the bands and the workers concerned. So far as our intervention is concerned, both parties know that it is available to them, the trade unions say they are willing to come when required, and we are awaiting a communication from the B.B.C.

asked the Minister of Labour how much public money was expended in producing the Ministry of Labour film "They Gave Him the Works"; and whether this film is going to be released, in view of the strong criticism it has already evoked.

This film, which deals with the important subject of joint consultation in industry, was produced by the Central Office of Information for my Department at a cost of £7,059. It has already been widely distributed in cinemas and, as can be expected of a film on a subject of public interest, has received both criticism and praise.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a number of people who saw the pre-view of this film in Manchester at the end of June were of the opinion that it depicted an old factory with the people quarrelling amongst themselves, and could do no good work for industrial relations? Will he have it withdrawn?

I do not know whether the hon. and gallant Gentleman has seen the film, but I have, and I consider it is a very good method of drawing attention to the differences that exist between management and workers, and is a good way of putting it over. I hope there will be an opportunity to show it in the House of Commons cinema next week.

May I ask who is the person to whom the works have to be given?

As the Minister is aware that there is very little hope of the employers giving the workers the works, should not the title of the film be, "Let Them Take The Works"?

Will the Minister confirm that the events depicted in this film are anything but typical of the good relations in the vast majority of factories in this country?

If hon. Members would only see the film, they would understand that it depicts the bad conditions at the beginning, the way to get good conditions, and the good conditions that have been obtained at the end.

asked the Minister of Labour how many Ukrainian prisoners of war remain in this country; what they are now doing; and what plans are there for their future disposal.

I understand from my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for War that 8,397 Ukrainian prisoners of war are still in this country. They are mainly employed on agricultural work. The answer to the last part of the Question is that this matter is still under consideration.

May I ask exactly what my right hon. Friend means when he says that he understands from the Secretary of State for War? Is not my right hon. Friend responsible for these men and, if so, can he say by what date his Department intends to make a decision as to their future?

The answer to the first part of the supplementary question is in the negative; I am not responsible for them.

In that case, can my right hon. Friend say why the Question was not transferred to the Secretary of State for War?

That is not a question for me to answer.

Is the Minister aware that this Question was first put down to the Secretary of State for War, who passed it on to my right hon. Friend?

Can we not have a further explanation from my right hon. Friend of his degree of responsibility?

asked the Minister of Labour if any special steps are contemplated to deal with the problem of resettling severely disabled unemployed persons in South Wales.

Yes, Sir. The Disabled Persons Employment Corporation has opened Remploy factories at Bridgend, Swansea and Treforest. Similar factories, at Blackwood, Tonyrefail, Treorchy, another place, beginning with Y—Ystradgynlais—Merthyr, Brynamman and Porth should be open by the end of the year and a further seven as soon as practicable thereafter. A homeworking scheme is based on the Bridgend factory and similar schemes will be developed from other factories.

Is my right hon. Friend satisfied that he will be able to absorb the greater proportion of the severely disabled persons from South Wales within the next 12 months?

I would not like to give a positive answer, but I can say that, for the purpose of collecting the rather scattered units in this area, we have now appointed a committee consisting of the chairmen of the local disabled persons employment advisory committees, with representatives of the British Legion and employers of workers, to co-ordinate the whole of the work and bring about more drive.

Is not the fact that the Minister is completely unable to pronounce Welsh names an indication that a Minister for Wales is required?

No, Sir. It is only an indication of the little pity which other hon. Members should have for a poor Cockney Minister.

If my right hon. Friend is unable to provide permanent factories as a result of this scheme, would he consider taking over existing temporary buildings so that they may be utilised to provide these facilities?

It is impossible, in answer to a supplementary question, to give further details, but we are already doing what the hon. Member has asked. I can assure him that we are most anxious to see that these scattered elements in this area are brought together and cared for.