§ 32. Miss WILKINSONasked the Minister of Health whether, in future, he will circulate to Members of the House any draft orders relating to the tasks of the casual poor and receive their suggestions?
§ 33. Miss WILKINSONasked the Minister of Health why he retained the 2785 oakum task for women when he had already received requests from the National Association of Masters and Matrons, the Union and Rural District Clerks' Association, and other associations to abolish it, and none in favour of retaining it, especially considering that these two associations were composed of a large number of persons immediately engaged in the work of the Poor Law; and why he increased the task for the one-night visitors?
Mr. CHAMBERLAINAs I explained to the hon. Member in reply to a previous question, the other associations to whom the draft order was submitted did not suggest the abolition of oakum picking for women casuals. Nothing in the order required a board of guardians who disapprove the task to apply it. I therefore saw no ground for altering the existing regulations on the point. As regards the last part of the question, I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to a previous similar question put by the hon. Member for Houghton-le-Spring, of which I am sending her a copy.
§ Miss WILKINSONMay I ask why, when the right hon. Gentleman receives an overwhelming, in fact a unanimous body of opinion from experts on this matter, he does not consider it necessary to carry out their recommendations?
§ Mr. WEBBHas the right hon. Gentleman received a single representation in favour of this practice?
Mr. CHAMBERLAINAs that matter was not mentioned, I took it that they did not hold any very strong opinion on that subject.
§ Miss WILKINSONHas not the Minister of Health been a little casuistical in this matter in stating that it was unanimous, whereas now he states that no strong opinion has been expressed against it?