§ 38. Mr. LAWSONasked the Minister of Labour if he is aware that the Bishop Auckland Board of Guardians have protested against the conditions governing unemployment benefit which came into operation on 19th February; that the guardians assert that large numbers of miners could not possibly comply with these conditions; that an additional burden of £300 per week will be laid upon the union; and that this view is endorsed by boards of guardians generally in the county of Durham; and whether, in the light of this evidence, he is prepared to withdraw the condition that no unemployment benefit will be paid to persons who have not paid the required number of contributions?
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLANDThe Bishop Auckland Board of Guardians and other Poor Law authorities have protested against the conditions of waiver of the first statutory condition for unemployment benefit, but for the reasons explained in the Debate of 9th March, I am afraid I cannot relax the requirement referred to.
§ Mr. LAWSONWhat is the point of this circular? Is it to make men seek work? It is absolutely impossible in this particular area, because of the unemployment there?
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLANDThe whole question really has been fully debated. I cannot, in answer to a supplementary question, cover ground that took up the whole Debate a few weeks ago.