§ 3. Mr. BENJAMIN SMITHasked the President of the Board of Trade whether he has now consulted the Tramp Shipping Administrative Committee as to the validity of lascar agreements on ships in respect of which subsidy has been claimed; and, if so, with what result?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANI am not aware of any reason for consulting the committee on this subject, but I may remind the hon. Member that lascar agreements are 779 Indian Government agreements signed in India under the supervision of the Indian Government's representatives.
§ Mr. SMITHHas not the right hon. Gentleman given the House to understand that the Maritime Board's agreements are the agreements which have to be met before the collection of the subsidy; and is he not now saying that he is extending these agreements to lascar agreements made in India for which the Maritime Board have no responsibility at all?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANNever at any time have I suggested that the Maritime Board have any responsibility. I have made quite clear on more than one occasion that these are Indian Government agreements.
§ Mr. SMITHWhy did the right hon. Gentleman say that he accepts them as conforming to the Maritime Board's agreements? The condition of the subsidy is that maritime rates are paid to British subjects.
§ Mr. RUNCIMANThe hon. Member is mistaken in imagining that the Maritime Board agreements apply in these cases.
§ Mr. SMITHThe point I want to get is this: Will the right hon. Gentleman see that maritime rates are enforced for all British seamen employed as a condition of receiving the subsidy?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANExcepting for lascars, in this case as in all others with which I have dealt in answer to questions, the British Government agreements apply.
§ Mr. SHINWELLIs not that a complete evasion of the whole spirit of the regulations governing the shipping subsidy agreement?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANNothing of the kind. It is a repetition of what has been said many times before.