§ 18. Mr. Keelingasked the Postmaster- General why his Savings Department re quires the parents of a child under seven years of age to prove that repayment of the child's certificates is necessary for the child's urgent need but repays, without question, on the child's signature, certificates held by a child of seven years of age, although that signature may be directed by the parents.
§ Mr. Ness EdwardsI would refer the hon. Member to the reply given by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the hon. and learned Member for Richmond (Sir G. Harvie-Watt) on 6th March.
§ Mr. KeelingAs a child of seven is bound to sign any document which his father or mother puts before him, what is the point of this rule, which causes a great deal of unnecessary work?
§ Mr. Ness EdwardsThis is a hundred years' old law. The Chancellor of the Exchequer yesterday gave an undertaking to review this whole question and to see what could be done to put it right. I agree that it is very anomalous.