20. Mr. WORTHINGTON - EVANSasked the Secretary to the Treasury whether, in the case of drift fishermen from the port of Lowestoft whose sole remuneration is a share in the profits, if any, of the voyage, there is a contract of employment necessitating insurance under the National Insurance Act, and, if so, who is liable for the employer's contribution; and whether the employer has any right to recover the fishermen's contributions if at the end of the voyage no share is payable to the fishermen?
§ Mr. MASTERMANOn the information given it is not possible to answer the first part of this question which, is really one for submission to the Commissioners in their judicial capacity under Section 66 of the Act. As regards the latter part the Act provides that where there is not money payment the employer shall not be entitled to recover any portion of the contribution, but on this point I would refer the hon. Member to the answer given to him on the 22nd instant.
Mr. WORTHINGTON-EVANSWill the right hon. Gentleman take steps to have a judicial decision given by the Insurance Commissioners in connection with these fishermen, as most of them are away on voyages and no one knows what is to be done?
§ Mr. MASTERMANThat is always being taken whenever any application is made to the Commissioners for the taking of such steps. These questions are not questions fit for question and answer.
Mr. WORTHINGTON-EVANSWill the right hon. Gentleman see that this point is raised by the Insurance Commissioners. In the absence of these men, how can they possibly raise the point?
§ Mr. MASTERMANIf any one who is interested in the welfare of these men will submit the case to the Insurance Commissioners steps will immediately be taken?
21. Mr. WORTHINGTON - EVANSasked whether, in the case of trawl fishermen where the master and mate are remunerated solely by share and the crew 1626 are paid a weekly wage, there is a contract of employment of the master and mate necessitating insurance under the National Insurance Act; and, if so, who is liable for the employer's contributions of the master and mate and of the paid crew, respectively?
§ Mr. MASTERMANThe information furnished is insufficient to enable me to give any opinion on the point. The method of remuneration has no necessary bearing on the question of a contract of service. If, however, the hon. Member will communicate full particulars to me privately I will endeavour to supply him with an answer.
22. Mr. WORTHINGTON - EVANSasked in the case of longshoremen where the boat is owned by one of two or three men who work it themselves, sharing the cost of gear and the proceeds of catches made, but not otherwise paid, whether there is a contract for employment necessitating insurance under the National Insurance Act; if so, who is liable for the employer's contributions; and whether the answer is the same where the three men work alternatively a boat belonging to each of the three men?
§ Mr. MASTERMANIn both the cases described the relation between the parties would appear to be in the nature of co-partnership and not employment, but, as I have already stated, it is not possible to deal with points of this kind with certainty without fuller particulars than can well be included in a Parliamentary question.