HC Deb 10 November 1927 vol 210 cc517-20

Considered in Committee under Standing Order No. 71A.

[Mr. JAMES HOPE in the Chair.]

Motion made, and Question proposed, That, for the purposes of any Act of the present Session relating to insurance against unemployment, it is expedient to authorise the payment, out of moneys provided by Parliament, of the sums necessary to enable seamen, marines, soldiers, and airmen discharged after the commencement of the said Act, to be credited under Section forty-one of The Unemployment Insurance Act, 1920, with thirty contributions. such contributions being treated as having been paid in respect of the discharged person at the rate of one contribution per week over a period ending with the week in which his discharge takes place."—[King's Recommendation signified.]—[Mr. Arthur Michael Samuel.]

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND

I will explain as briefly as possible the purpose of this Financial Resolution. It is explained in the White Paper which has been in the hands of the Committee. This Resolution will enable members of the Army, Navy and Air Force, when leaving, to start under favourable conditions as regards unemployment insur- ance. The conditions are to be altered in the proposed Bill, and the effect of this Financial Resolution is to insure that a proper adjustment is made. It gives members of the Army and Navy and the Reserve Force credit for 30 contributions, which will enable them to obtain the maximum amount possible if the new Bill is passed into law.

Mr. RAMSAY MacDONALD

I should like to associate myself with the Resolution which has been moved. My only regret is that it did not apply to other people besides soldiers and sailors. Any proposal which will allow more people to come under the small benefit provided will not be opposed by us.

Mr. J. JONES

No one is opposing this Resolution because we want to do any injustice to the ex-service men or men of the Army, Navy or Air Force in the intervening period, but I might remind the House that there are 300,000 men who fought in the War, and of whom a large number will be disqualified by this Bill. Are not the men who fought in the Great War entitled to as much consideration as those who have joined the Army since the War was over? Why do you want to give these people special privileges as against the men who risked their lives when you wanted them? These are not peace-time soldiers for whom we are appealing; all the unemployed to-day did their bit, whether at the benches or in the trenches. I know what it means. "Feed the soldier; we may want him, not merely for war abroad but for the purposes of upset at home." It is a cheap defence of people who made money out of their patriotism. We shall not object to this provision, but we ask why there should not be equal treatment for all who have rendered service, either in the Army, Navy or Air Force, or at the bench, or wherever they have done useful service to the community.

I heard it said by one Member of the House this afternoon that he would only give unemployment benefit to people who had served in the Army, Navy or Air Force; the rest could fend for themselves. He is in favour of 8s. and 10s. a week for young men and women of the working class. The same gentleman can afford to spend £7,000 for a two-year-old horse that will cost £5 a week to keep. He thinks more of a horse than of a human being. We want to see more generous treatment all round, without selecting a special section, if we are to have unemployment insurance. I am opposed to it. I do not care who says he believes in the contributory system; I believe in one national system. We can keep 360,000 rich unemployed at a cost of £1,600,000,000 a year—people who admit that they never did a useful day's work in their lives, and never intend to, and who, if they tried to work, could not. There are no training schools for them.

The CHAIRMAN

The hon. Member is getting some little way from the Resolution.

Mr. JONES

I was getting near to the problem of unemployment. We are not opposing the Vote of money for this particular purpose, but it is a free gift of 30 weeks' contributions to people, some of whom have not paid anything; they are not part of the compulsory contributory scheme. They are going to get a free grant of 30 weeks which will qualify them to receive full benefit during the operation of the Measure, while others who have been paying for years and years, and who rendered equal service when called upon to do so, are going to be automatically disqualified—thousands of them. Therefore, we say that this is a one-handed way of dealing with the problem. Treat all the people of the country alike. Let us have equality of sacrifice and equality of advantage. This is only a little bit of sugar for the bird, to show what great patriots there are. We say, help those who really faced the issue in the hour of danger. While supporting the Money Resolution, we protest most emphatically against this one-sided method of administration.

Resolution to be reported To-morrow.

The remaining Government Orders were read, and postponed.

Whereupon Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER, pursuant to the Order of the House of 8th November, proposed the Question, "That this House do now adjourn."

Adjourned accordingly at Twenty Minutes after Eleven o'Clock.