§ 34. Mr. WARDLAW-MILNEasked the Minister of Labour whether there is difficulty in finding suitable women to fill this vacancies for domestic servants, amounting to 4,594, for whom situations existed at the Employment Exchanges of Great Britain on 7th December last; and whether he will take steps to notify the Exchanges that benefit will not be continued to women who are suitable for this employment and who refuse to undertake it provided a reasonable standard of conditions as regards wages, leave, and leisure time can be arranged for such employment?
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLANDAs is well known, there is considerable difficulty in filling vacancies for resident domestic servants in private houses. The Exchanges fill a number of such vacancies each week and have already definite instructions to the effect suggested in the second part of the question, provided of course also that there is no reasonable objection, e.g., in the form of distance or family circumstances of the applicant.
§ Mr. N. MACLEANIs it not the case that, if these women go into private domestic service, they at once contract out of insurable employment; and will 1915 the right hon. Gentleman take into consideration the fact that in most cases these women since leaving school have been in insurable occupations, and that it is not the duty of the Exchange to ask them to transfer out of the occupations to which they have been accustomed?
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLANDI think the hon. Member is not correct in his inference. Of course, as to whether women in such cases have or have not been in insurable employment in the past, the fact is that if they have been, and if they go out to domestic service—which employment is not itself insurable—they do not necessarily lose their insurable status.
§ Mr. MACLEANIs it not the case that as soon as they go into private domestic service they go into a non-insurable occupation; and that, before they can get the stamps upon which benefit will be paid in the future, they must be in insurable employment?
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLANDThe main point is this. It is just the same in the case of women who go into domestic service, as in the case of men who temporarily take up work on the land. In either case the job which they are to undertake is not in itself insurable, but they do not simply for that reason lose their status as insured persons, unless they take it up permanently or show the intention of taking it up permanently.
§ Mr. BUCHANANIs the Minister aware that there is a growing disposition among the parents of these girls not to allow them to go to domestic service owing to certain cases in the Law Courts; and will he take steps to secure that those women who are transferred to domestic service, are sent to homes where the parents can be assured of their being properly treated?
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLANDWe look into the propriety of the employment in any case.
§ Mr. BUCHANANMay I press the Minister, if his last answer is correct, as to whether he has any staff employed as investigators into the homes of those people to whom girls are transferred as domestic servants? [HON MEMBERS: "Answer!"]
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe hon. Member ought to put that question down. That point does not necessarily arise out of the right hon. Gentleman's answer.
§ Mr. BUCHANANOn a point of Order. A question has been put on the Paper which, in fact, reflects on certain women by suggesting that they do not want work. Are we not entitled to see that these women have no such reflection cast upon them?
§ Mr. WARDLAW-MILNEOn a point of Order—
§ Mr. SPEAKERI do not think it is necessary to pursue the matter. Question 35.
§ Mr. KIRKWOODOn a point of Order, Sir. Are these girls not as much entitled to ask their employer for a character as the employers are entitled to ask the servant girl for references as to her character! [HON. MEMBERS: "Order!"] Order yourselves!
§ Mr. KIRKWOODWe can roar "Order, order!" until further orders, as well as hon. Members opposite.
§ Mr. SPEAKERI think hon. Members should allow me to deal with one point at a time. There is no point of Order in the question put by the hon. Member for Dumbarton Burghs (Mr. Kirkwood).
§ Mr. WARDLAW-MILNEOn a point of Order. I want to submit that a statement has been made from the other side regarding my motives in putting down this question, which statement is quite improper. This question does not cast any aspersion upon any class, and I very strongly object to the suggestion that it does.
§ Mr. MACLEANMay I ask if it is not a reflection upon these women to suggest, as this question does that benefit ought to be refused to them. Does not that mean that the hon. Member is inferring that these women are not genuinely seeking employment? That is the reflection.
§ Mr. BUCHANANIt is most offensive.
Sir F. HALLIs an hon. Member entitled after you, Sir, have called the 1917 next Question on the Paper—as you did in this case—to raise further Supplementary Questions and to go back upon the previous question?[Interruption.]
§ Mr. SPEAKERHon. Members are redly preventing their colleagues from being heard. I do not think it is necessary to prolong this matter.
§ Mr. MACLEANWhy does not the hon. Member apologise? [HON. MEMBERS "Order!"]
§ Mr. KIRKWOODWe can shout "Order!" as well as they can. [HON. MEMBERS: "Name!"] You can name me if you like.
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe matter is one which rests in my discretion, and I must be allowed to deal with it in my awn way. Mr. Pilcher.