asked the Minister of Labour whether he is now in a position to state what action he intends to take regarding the intimation by Scottish Oils and Shell-Mex, Limited, to youths of 19 years of age that their services may be terminated, which is quite contrary to the undertakings given that the rights of these youths would be protected?

I understand that in the case of lorry-boys, who are normally engaged by this company at the age of 16, warning is given at the time of engagement that owing to the limited number of vacancies their continued employment after the age of 19 cannot be guaranteed. This has been the practice of the company for a number of years. It is evident that the matter has no relation to the Military Training Act.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether there is anything about the matter which indicates blind-alley employment, and are there no means of protecting these youth?

We are constantly making inquiries. As the hon. Member knows, the production of some businesses is such that the number of jobs for men is limited in comparison with the total, and, as in the case, the hon. Member will remember, raised in Birmingham with regard to the co-operative society, the giving of notice to boys of 16 is of great advantage.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a general circular has been sent out to all youths of 19 years of age that they may not be employed any longer?

I understand that the practice is as stated in the answer.

Will the Minister take care that, in this general warning, they are not using their powers to dispense with the services of lads of 19 because of their being called up?

Certainly, Sir.

May I ask my right hon. Friend, arising out of —

The time that is being spent upon these questions is much too long.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that Mr. R. J. Hall, of Welwyn Garden City, recently informed his employers, namely, G. Street; Company, adertising agents, of Serle Street, Lincoln's Inn, that he was liable to service under the Military Training Act, and that within one week of so informing his employers Mr. Hall was dismissed from their service; and will he cause inquiries to be made into the circumstances of this young man's dismissal?

I have no information about this particular case, but am making inquiry on the basis of a letter I have received from the hon. Member.

Is it not the duty of the Minister to make an inquiry about this case to see that young men are not victimised in this way?

I am making constant inquiries, and some of the inquiries show that the allegations which are made are not always substantiated.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say why an inquiry was not made by his Department into this particular case having regard to the fact that I gave notice of this question earlier in the week?

I had no information about this case, and I am obliged to the hon. Member for sending me a letter which gave me information I did not possess.

What action is the Minister now taking in regard to this case? The letters I have received show quite clearly that this young man was dismissed because he was liable to be called up under the Military Training Act.

I shall do my best to find out whether the allegations in the letter which the hon. Member sent to me are substantiated.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the answers given in previous cases are interpreted as almost an encouragement to employers to do this kind of thing? Will he so conduct his inquiry as to make it plain to an employer that it is a grave social offence?

On the contrary, I do not think the hon. Member can have read the answers carefully. Perhaps he will remember the saying of Thomas Carlyle, that it takes two to tell the truth—one to speak and the other to use it.

When questions are put down which obviously involve inquiry, is it not the duty of the Minister to make his inquiries during the time which elapses between putting the question down and the date when the reply is to be given?

The inquiries sometimes take a long time.