§ 74. Mr. C. WHITEasked the Minister of Labour whether any provision has been made yet for the assistance of apprentices who have lost several years of training owing to the fact that they have been serving in His Majesty's forces?
§ Mr. PARKER (Lord of the Treasury)I would suggest that the question be 915 referred to the answer given to the Member for Birkenhead East, of which I enclose a copy.
75. Lieutenant-Colonel Sir J. HOPEasked the Minister of Labour whether he will consider the advisability of extending the date of 1st February, 1919, before which all applications for demobilition of apprentices must be received in order to meet cases where the applications have been delayed through no fault of the applicants?
§ Mr. PARKERThe Government, after careful consideration, decided that it was necessary to make a clean-cut in order that there might be a definite and ascertained body of men available to constitute the Armies of Occupation. Any extension of the date of application for pivotal men would defeat this policy. My right hon. Friend regrets, therefore, that he is not able to entertain this suggestion.
Sir J. HOPEDoes that mean that apprentices whose employers, owing to not understanding the various regulations and forms, have been delayed in sending in applications will suffer and be detained for the Army of Occupation, and can no concession be made to these apprentices?
§ Mr. PARKERI am afraid I can only repeat the answer I have already given, that my hon. Friend cannot see his way to entertain the suggestion of the hon. Member
§ Mr. G. TERRELLIs the hon. Member aware that there are some very hard cases arising in connection with this clean-cut data, and will he reconsider the matter?
§ Mr. PARKERI am aware that there are hard cases, and I am sure my hon. Friend knows about them.