HC Deb 16 November 1927 vol 210 cc1037-9
34. Viscount SANDON

asked the Minister of Labour in view of the fact that the State training scheme for Empire emigrants run by his Department costs 53s. a week per youth, and that the Salvation Army scheme costs 30s., what extra advantages lie in the State scheme to account and compensate for the additional cost; and whether he has considered contracting out this work at a lesser cost to such Voluntary societies as are prepared so to tender?


I understand the figures quoted are not comparable as regards the items of cost included or as regards the age of the persons trained and the extent of the training. I understand that it is open to any voluntary society which can undertake training for overseas to apply to the Overseas Settlement Department for a grant in aid under the Empire Settlement Act.

Viscount SANDON

Can the right hon. Gentleman give particulars of what the differences are? I mean, will he publish them at some time?


If the hon. Member will communicate with me, I will make inquiries and see in what form any particulars can be given.


Have not the Salvation Army activities in promoting Empire settlement been extraordinarily successful, and do they not pay great attention to training the men, placing them in responsible positions, and looking after them afterwards; and cannot the right hon. Gentleman take greater advantage of it?


The hon. Member should put those questions down.

42. Captain CROOKSHANK

asked the Minister of Labour what is the cost of the training of men prior to migration overseas under the scheme administered by his Department as compared with the cost of training soldiers under the similar scheme administered by the War Office?


I am not sure that comparable figures can be-obtained, but I am inquiring into the matter and will communicate the result to my hon. and gallant Friend.


May I ask my right hon. Friend if his training advisers are taking advantage of the experience gained by the Army vocational training?


Yes, they are in communication one with another.

60. Mr. HAYES

asked the Minister of Labour how many applications have been received during the past 12 months at Merseyside Employment Exchanges from unemployed men for training with a view to taking up employment on the land in Australia, Canada, etc.; the number of applications rejected; and whether applicants are informed of the grounds upon, which rejection is made?


128 unemployed men have applied at the Merseyside Exchanges in the last 12 months for training for settlement in Australia. Eleven withdrew their applications and 57 were not accepted by the Dominion authorities. Eighty-two unemployed men have applied for training for settlement in Canada. Ten withdrew their applications and 16 were not accepted By the Dominion authorities. The decision as to suitability for training for settlement overseas rests with the representatives of the Dominion Governments and these authority do not normally disclose the reasons for their decisions.


In the event of rejection taking place on account of suggestions that men are not suitable, in the sense that they have not been genuinely seeking work, might the applicant not have an opportunity of hearing the evidence against him?


I do not know on what grounds the Dominion authorities reject applicants. As far as I know, generally it is on physical grounds.


Does the right hon. Gentleman's answer mean that all applicants not rejected have either proceeded to a training centre or will be given facilities to go?


As a matter of fact, all those not rejected were admitted to the training centre.


Would it not be better to see whether these men are physically fit before they go for training?


That is what is done.


When are these men submitted for examination to the Dominion authorities?


They are submitted to the Dominion authorities before they go to the training centres.

The following Table shows the estimated numbers of persons in certain industries in Great Britain insured under the Unemployment Insurance Acts and the numbers of such persons recorded as unemployed at certain dates in 1925, 1926 and 1927 respectively.
Industry. 1925. 1926. 1927.
Estimated numbers insured at July. Number of insured persons unemployed at 22nd June. Difference. Estimated numbers insured at July. Number of insured persons unemployed at 21st June.* Difference.* Estimated numbers insured at July. Number of insured persons unemployed at 20th June. Difference.
Construction and repair of motor vehicles, cycles and aircraft. 212,590 11,974 200,616 221,810 22,056 199,754 230,970 12,638 218,332
Silk 46,550 2,956 43,594 50,820 5,565 45,255 55,040 3,268 51,772
Lace 19,500 3,377 16,123 18,880 3,750 15,130 18,170 1,403 16,767
Musical instruments. 21,630 1,266 20,364 24,380 3,996 20,384 24,700 2,073 22,627
*The figures for June, 1926, are affected by the increase of unemployment due to the general stoppage in the coal mining industry.
The columns headed "Difference" would include at each date a number of persons who were not actually at work as a result of sickness, or holidays, or unrecorded unemployment.