§ 41. Mr. RHYS DAVIESasked the Minister of Labour whether he proposes to publish any statement showing in what respect Great Britain desires to see the Eight-hours Washington Convention amended before extending to it the ratification of the British Government?
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLANDThe question of the revision of this Convention has already been discussed at length by the representatives of the Government both at Geneva and in this House, and is to be considered further by the Governing Body of the International Labour Office at its next Session. In these circumstances it would be premature to publish any detailed statement of the kind suggested by the honourable Member.
§ Mr. DAVIESWill the right hon. Gentleman promise that when those negotiations have been completed, we shall get a statement as to the attitude of the British Government on the subject?
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLANDWhich negotiations?
§ Mr. DAVIESThe negotiations to which the right hon. Gentleman referred—the negotiations at Geneva?
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLANDThe negotiations at Geneva are discussions of the governing body of the International 882 Labour Office, and I imagine that the usual report will be at the disposal of every Member of this House who wishes to read it.
§ Mr. T. SHAWHas the Minister stated at Geneva what are the precise objections of the British Government to ratifying the Washington Convention?
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLANDI have discussed them enough in this House to make it perfectly clear that a revision of the Convention is absolutely necessary.
§ Mr. SHAWThat was not my question. I have asked the right hon. Gentleman precisely whether he has ever stated at Geneva to the other Governments what are his grounds for declining to agree to the Washington Convention. Has he ever stated to them what he desires to be altered before His Majesty's Government will consent to ratification?
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLANDI have stated enough in this House—
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLANDIt was only a general proposition that was brought forward on the last occasion at Geneva. I am perfectly willing to let them know the whole of the reasons that I have put before this House, and those are ample in themselves to warrant our attitude.
§ Mr. SPEAKERThat is not in Order.
§ Mr. SHAWOn a point of Order. The Minister did not give an answer to the question which was asked. Twice he gave an answer to a question which was not asked. My question was quite precise, namely: has the Minister ever stated to the other Government representatives at Geneva the conditions required by this country before it will ratify the Convention? That is a perfectly plain question.
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe right hon. Gentleman must understand that there is no compulsion upon a Minister to answer supplementary questions.