§ Mr. SHAW
I have received the Report of this Committee, and, as it is quite short, I am circulating a copy in the OFFICIAL REPORT. It would not, I think, be in accordance with precedent, nor would it be desirable, to publish an account of the proceedings of the Committee other than the Report. No evidence was taken.
§ Following is the Report referred to:
§ Trade Dispute Disqualification Committee.
§ 4th March, 1924.
§ I have the honour to submit the following Report:
§ The above Committee was appointed 'to examine the working of the Trade Dispute Disqualification for Unemployment Benefit as contained in Section 87 (1) of the National Insurance Act, 1911, and Section 8 (1) of the Unemployment Insurance Act, 1920, and to consider whether any, and, if so, what modification should be made therein.'
§ The Committee have held many meetings and have given earnest and careful consideration to the matters referred to them. They regret, however, that they are unable to reach agreement as to whether any, and, if so, what modification should be made in the existing law. They have requested me, therefore, on their behalf, to report to you to that effect.
§ I have the honour to be,
§ Your obedient Servant,
§ (Sgd.) W. B. YATES (Chairman):"
§ 41. Mr. GRAHAM WHITE
asked the Minister of Labour if the dock workers in the Merseyside area who were employed for one or more days during the month prior to 16th February last have been disqualified for receipt of unemployment benefit under Section 8 (1) of the Unemployment Insurance Act, 1923, in connection with the recent dockers' dispute, while similar workers who were totally unemployed in the same period have not been so disqualified; and, if so, will he state why this distinction is made?