HC Deb 29 April 1926 vol 194 cc2200-1
55. Mr. MARDY JONES (for Mr. SCURR)

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he has received a protest from the Indian Merchants' Chamber with reference to the nomination of Sir Arthur Froom as the Indian employers' representative at the forthcoming session of the International. Labour Conference at Geneva; and if he will give the name of the representative Indian organisation consulted by the Government in connection with this nomination in accordance with Article 389 of the Versailles Treaty?

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for INDIA(Earl Winterton)

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. It is not the practice of the Government of India to consult individual organisations regarding the nomination of delegates to International Labour Conferences, but to issue a Press communique inviting associations to send in their recommendations. The usual course was followed on the present occasion and recommendations were received from Chambers of Commerce, Bengal, Bombay and the United Provinces, the Indian Merchants' Chamber, Bombay, and the Buyers' and Shippers' Chamber, Karachi. The Bengal and Bombay Chambers of Commerce recommended Sir Arthur Froom, and as these bodies include nearly all the shipping interests of India, while none of the others represents any substantial amount of ship- ping, the Government of India thought it their clear duty, under Article 389 of the Treaty of Versailles, to nominate Sir Arthur Froom.


Can the Noble Lord tell us whether the practice obtaining in India in this connection coincides with the practice of this country?


I think the hon. Gentleman must see that I must have notice of that question. The hon. Gentleman will realise that it is no part of my official duty to know what the practice is here. The practice in India, I can assure him, is in accordance with the rules laid down by the international body.

Back to