asked the Minister of Labour what was the reason for the abandonment of the scheme to train 50,000 ex-service men as dilutees in the skilled branches of the building trade; for how many of these trainees was employment actually found; and whether the present Government have any scheme under contemplation for the training of ex-service men as building dilutees?

With regard to the first part of the question, I understand that, as a result of the continued depression in the building industry, it was found impossible to absorb more than a small proportion of the applicants for training under the scheme, and that it was finally abandoned. I am not in a position to say how many trainees found employment. As regards the last part of the question, I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave last week to the hon. Member for Harborough, a copy of which I am sending him.

Will the right hon. Gentleman explain what he means about the continued depression of the building industry, considering that for years past there has been a great dearth of skilled men in the building trade?

The scheme to which the hon. Member refers is the scheme of another Government, and I am giving him an answer, from the Department, which apparently that Government received.

In view of the official statement of the Minister of Health, that there is a very large demand row for skilled industry in the building trade, will my right hon. Friend see whether this scheme cannot be revived?

Are we to understand that the Government have no scheme of their own?

The hon. Member must understand exactly what I said. I said that this was the scheme of another Government and that the facts which I have given were the facts conveyed to that Government, and I cannot be responsible either for the scheme or for the facts that emerge from it.

Sir F. HALL:

Is the right hon. Gentlemen aware that the then Minister of Health, the right hon. Member for North-West Camberwell (Dr. Macnamara), used his best endeavours to employ these ex-service men for this purpose, and that the trade unions would not allow them to be employed?

Will the right hon. Gentleman reply to my question? Will he consider the revival of the scheme, regardless of what any previous Government has done?

I will consider any point put by any hon. Member from any part of the House, but I cannot give any guarantees as to action.