I assure the hon. Lady that I should not have requested her presence at this late hour, or, indeed, detained you, Mr. Deputy-Speaker, in the Chair but for the fact that I have been balloting for this Adjournment since before Christmas. Having at last been successful, I cannot throw away this golden opportunity. In October last, an important organisation in my Constituency, the Beverley Service Welfare Bureau, which handles all problems which concern the proper conduct of assistance to Servicemen, expressed anxiety about the difficulty of returning soldiers in finding employment. Their investigations covered a wide field, including Government Departments. I was approached to try to find out what sort of percentage of ex-Servicemen and women were, in fact, so employed. The two Departments in which they showed primary interest were the Ministry of Agriculture and the Ministry of Food.

I accordingly tabled the necessary Questions. The right hon. Gentleman the Minister of Agriculture was immediately forthcoming, and supplied me with a figure of 67 per cent., which I admit at once is entirely satisfactory. I was not so fortunate with the Minister of Food. I tabled a Question to him last Session, on 4th November, asking what percentage of ex-Servicemen and women were employed by his Department, giving separate calculations for each sex, and distinguishing between those temporarily and permanently employed. He replied that the information could not be supplied without an undue expenditure of time and labour. However, when the new Session came upon us, I tried again. The right hon. Gentleman was the first Minister on the list, I put the Question down again on 2nd December. The right hon. Gentleman referred me to his previous reply, and I then put this supplementary question: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I put down an identical Question to his right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture and an informative reply was forthcoming in seven days? To this, the Minister of Food replied: Yes, but my right hon. Friend has the good fortune to have a very much smaller staff and Department to deal with."—[OFFICIAL. REPORT, and Dec., 1946; Vol. 431, c. 2.] It was at that point that I gave notice that I intended to raise the matter on the Adjournment, which at long last has now come my way. First of all, I must comment on the revealing nature of that reply. It really is rather interesting that a far smaller staff are engaged in the work of production of food than is engaged in what I must describe as its maldistribution. I have endeavoured to make some inquiries into the situation, and the first evidence I could get came from the Parliamentary Secretary's speech in the House on 7th March. Replying to some observations from my hon. Friend the Member for Louth (Mr. Osborne), she said: He must take into account that we employ very many married women. I think I gave the figure for Liverpool the other day—there are about 40 per cent. married women there—and throughout the country many of these workers are part-time, and we are very glad to have their services."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 7th March, 1947; Vol. 434, c. 871.] That takes us a certain distance along the road. Yesterday, we had some more information. It was, perhaps, fortunate that I was not able to raise the matter until tonight, after all. Yesterday, we were informed that there are 2,000 more officials in the Ministry of Food, and that there is an increase in the Estimates on account of salaries of this Department of £563,000. I am bound to remark that in this Ministry the staff appears to increase in inverse ratio to the supplies available to the public, and I think we should know a bit more about it. There is a famous nursery rhyme about the old woman who lived in a shoe, and had so many children she did not know what to do. No one would be so unchivalrous and so far divorced from the truth as to apply that description to the hon. Lady the Parliamentary Secretary, but I think it could reasonably be applied to the right hon. Gentleman the Minister of Food. He has so many children that he does not know what they do, or at least is not prepared to tell us in the House. I submit that the House is entitled to know to what extent ex-Service men and women are getting opportunities of employment under this Ministry. I would like to say, in parenthesis, however, and in all good temper, that I hope none of them is engaged in the task of snooping. I hope they were not concerned in the instance in Brighton where an official and his typist went to dine at a restaurant—in agreeable circumstances—in the hope of coaxing the waitress into committing some breach of the regulations from which a prosecution could result. That would be abhorrent to ex-Service men and women of all kinds. I hope they are not engaged in the scrutiny of anonymous letters, which we have been informed form an important part of the intelligence system of the Ministry of Food, but which every hon. Member puts into the nearest wastepaper basket.

There has been a veil of secrecy over the Ministry of Food for some time. My hon. Friends have endeavoured on many occasions to obtain information about some of these bulk purchase transactions, and they have not been fortunate in that matter. I hope that the hon. Lady will see fit to lift at least one corner of the veil when she makes the observations which I know she will make tonight. I wish to make a further observation. I am sorry that the Minister is absent from the House. Had the right hon. Gentleman been here, I would like to have said it to him, but perhaps the hon. Lady will be good enough to convey to him what I am about to say. During the war, the right hon. Gentleman the Minister of Food performed an important function as one of the publicity experts of the Royal Air Force. We all remember those excellent broadcasts he used to give from time to time on the work of that very great body of men, the Royal Air Force, and it is very disappointing to me that one who was so successful in that sphere should have closed up like an oyster—oysters are still obtainable, I believe, in luxury establishments—in the matter of giving information about the Ministry over which he presides. I think it is a very disappointing development, and one which the House is entitled to probe, because we really are interested in this matter of the placing in employment of ex-servicemen and women. I make it a matter of complaint that the right hon. Gentleman did not think it worth while to give this information when the question was first tabled in November, or when it was tabled again in December. I cannot believe that this information is unobtainable. It is forthcoming from other Departments, and I suggest that if it is really unobtainable, it reflects upon the efficiency of this Department. However, I have come down here more in a spirit of hope, than in a spirit of criticism. I have a feeling that the hon. Lady is going to satisfy my curiosity. I believe she sits there armed with the necessary information, at least, in general, which we are seeking, and it is with that hope that I raise this matter.