asked the Minister of Transport how many train men abandoned their trains during the course of a journey, in the months of November and December, 1946, and if he will give a comparable figure for the year 1945.

Three hundred and nineteen train men left their trains during the course of journeys in November and December, 1946. In the same two months of 1945, the number was 251.

Is the Minister able to tell us what he is going to do about this increasing practice? Surely, it is something to which he should give his immediate attention?

The gravity of this matter is, of course, appreciated, but, in most cases, the men had already done a full shift, and that is part of the problem of keeping the flow of men going under present conditions.

Is the Minister aware that many of these men had worked very excessive hours of duty and that, had they not left their trains, they would have been unable to perform their next turn of duty; and, further, that, in many cases, this action is taken with the knowledge of the control office concerned?

Yes, Sir, I have had a few taken off. In one case, the men had worked a continuous duty of 17 hours.

Is the Minister aware that the word "abandoned" is used in the Question, whereas the right hon. Gentleman himself in his answer used the word "left"? Is not the usual procedure to leave trains in sidings, properly controlled, and that if a train crew abandoned their train, it would have very serious consequences as far as the railway system is concerned? In the cases referred to, were the trains abandoned, or merely left in the sidings in the normal way?

I cannot, of course, control the language in which a Question is put down, and the whole problem is really too complex and involved to answer by way of supplementary questions.

Is it not a fact that these men do abandon the trains and that they are brought before the superintendent of the area and receive three days' suspension which, in view of P.A.Y.E., they are pleased to receive?

asked the Minister of Transport how many train men failed to report for duty in the months of November and December, 1946, and how these compare with the prewar average.

As the answer contains a number of figures I will, with the hon. and gallant Member's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the answer:

asked the Minister of Transport (1) how many railway train men were unable to be relieved at the conclusion of their normal eight hours' turn of duty during the months of November and December, 1946; and what was the longest period of duty of any train man on any one day and one week in the same period;

(2) how much overtime and Sunday duty was worked by railway train men during the months of November and December, 1946, who at any time during that period failed to report for duty.

The railway companies advise me that a vast amount of research work would be involved in the preparation of materials to answer this Question and No. 5. In present circumstances, I do not feel justified in asking them to undertake the work.

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the very long hours at present being worked by train men and others concerned in railway operations, particularly during the present fuel crisis?

Yes, Sir, I am aware of that, and it is because of those difficulties that I do not think I can direct railway companies to put staff on to a rather big job of this description.