HC Deb 28 July 1914 vol 65 c1117
62. Mr. F. HALL (Dulwich)

asked the hon. Member for St. George's-in-the-East, as representing the Insurance Commissioners, if the Insurance Commissioners have decided that lion tamers must be insured but that onion peelers need not be; if he can state the grounds on which this distinction is drawn; and if, in view of the absence of a considered and rational policy in determining as to the liability of different classes of workers to be insured, he will consider as to appointing a Committee of experts to deal with this question?

Mr. BENN

Employment as an onion peeler has been specified in a special Order as a subsidiary employment, and contributions are not required to be paid in respect of persons so employed, if they are not already insured persons. No Order has been made with regard to employment as a lion tamer.

Mr. HALL

May I ask the hon. Gentleman if the Insurance Commissioners did not make a Regulation last year that lion tamers must be insured, and can he tell me what Regulation there is in regard to who shall or shall not be insured?

Mr. BENN

If a person is employed in contract service he is insurable, unless he is excepted under the second part of the Schedule.

Mr. CROOKS

What about donkey tamers?

Mr. HALL

Then you will be insured.