§ 53. Mr. CECIL WILSONasked the Minister of Labour (1) whether he is aware that unemployment benefit has been refused to Luke Coats, 2, Yeomans Road, Sheffield, box 15, book No. 138,391, class 194/6, on the grounds 1026 that he was not making reasonable effort to find employment; whether he is aware that this man ceased work in June, 1926, after seven years' continuous employment with Messrs. Hollingworth and Pickard, and that he is a motor driver, handyman, and rough joiner, and has produced letters of prospective employment from several employers; and whether inquiry will be made into this case;
(2) whether he is aware that unemployment benefit has been refused to Leonard Gadd, 38, Burton Street, on the ground that he is not making reasonable effort to find employment; that several letters have been produced to the Sheffield Guardians showing that repeated attempts have been made to secure employment and interviews taken plane; that this man of 23 has tramped to Leeds and other places and back in fruitless efforts to find work; and whether further inquiry can be made into the case;
(3) whether he is aware that unemployment benefit has been refused to George B. Cauldwell, 967, Penistone Road, Sheffield, box 33, book No. 144,364, class 20/2, on the ground that insurable employment is not available; that this man of 64 years of age has recently been in regular employment as a wheelwright at Bridge Foundry, Rotherham, ceasing work on 3rd September, 1927; and, seeing that he has every prospect of restarting work any day, can he state why it is that this decision has been arrived at?
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLANDI have had inquiries instituted into the cases referred to in these question, and will communicate with the hon. Member regarding each case as soon as possible.
§ 39. Mr. WELLOCKasked the Minister of Labour what is the respective number of persons who have applied for benefit and who have been refused benefit, and the reasons for the refusal, at the Stourbridge, Oldbury, and Cradley Heath exchanges during the first nine months of the current year?
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLANDDuring the period 28th December, 1926, to 26th September, 1927, the number of claims to benefit, including repeat claims from the same individuals, made at the employment exchanges named was 29,259, of which 6,679 were made at Stour- 1027 bridge, 5,460 at Oldbury, and 17,120 at Cradley Heath. During the nine months ended 10th October, 1927, out of 12,920 applications for extended benefit considered by the local committees at these exchanges, 2,907were recommended by the
| APPLICATIONS for Extended Benefit considered by the Local Committees at Stourbridge, Oldbury and Cradley Heath, during the nine months ended 10th October, 1927. | |||
| — | Stourbridge. | Oldbury. | Cradley Heath. |
| Applications considered by Committees during period | 3,952 | 2,678 | 6,290 |
| Applications admitted by Committees during period | 3,237 | 2,096 | 4,680 |
| Applications recommended for disallowance during period:— | |||
| Not normally insurable and not seeking to obtain a livelihood by means of insurable employment. | 12 | 12 | 10 |
| Insurable employment not likely to be available | 8 | 2 | 24 |
| Not a reasonable period of insurable employment during the preceding two years. | 249 | 171 | 395 |
| Not making every reasonable effort to obtain suitable employment or not willing to accept suitable employment. | 105 | 97 | 146 |
| Single persons residing with relatives | 198 | 115 | 164 |
| Married women who could look for support from their husbands. | 7 | 45 | 141 |
| Married men who could look for support from their wives. | — | 4 | — |
| Working short time but earning sufficient for maintenance. | 136 | 131 | 730 |
| Aliens | — | 1 | — |
| Postponed for a definite time | — | 4 | — |
| Total recommended for disallowance | 715 | 582 | 1,610 |
§ 47. Mr. SMEDLEY CROOKEasked the Minister of Labour the total number of persons who applied for unemployment benefit in the city of Birmingham during the past two months and the number refused; and the number of men and women, respectively?
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLANDAs the reply involves a number of figures in tabular form, I will, if I may, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.
§ Following is the reply:
§ During the nine weeks ended 31st October, 1927, 30,896 claims to bene-
| APPLICATIONS FOR EXTENDED BENEFIT considered by Local Committees in the Birmingham Area during the two months ended 10th October, 1927. | |||||
| — | Men. | Boys. | Women. | Girls. | Total. |
| Applications considered | 12,131 | 68 | 2,309 | 41 | 14,549 |
| Applications recommended for— | |||||
| Allowance | 10,845 | 38 | 881 | 16 | 11,780 |
| Disallowance | 1,286 | 30 | 1,428 | 25 | 2,769 |
§ committees for disallowance. I am circulating in the OFFICIAL REPORT a statement showing the reasons for disallowance. Corresponding figures for standard benefit claims are not available.
§ Following is the statement:
§ fit, including repeat claims by the same individuals, were made at employment exchanges in the Birmingham area, of which 21,312 were made by men, 7,422 by women, and 2,162 by juveniles. During the two months ended 10th October, 1927, 14,549 applications for extended benefit were considered by local committees in that area, of which 11,780 were recommened for allowance and 2,769 for disallowance. Corresponding statistics in respect of claims for standard benefit are not available. The following statement gives separate figures regarding the decisions on the claims for extended benefit of men, women and juveniles:
102944. Mr. W. M. WATSONasked the Minister of Labour the number of claims to unemployment benefit disallowed in the Dunfermline and Kirkcaldy districts of Fife from the beginning of the year to the latest available date; how many were from male and female claimants;
| * APPLICATIONS FOR EXTENDED BENEFIT considered by the Local Committees in the Dunfermline and Kirkcaldy areas during the period 7th January to 10th October, 1927. | ||||||||
| — | Dunfermline District. | Kirkcaldy District. | ||||||
| Men. | Women. | Juveniles. | Total. | Men. | Women. | Juveniles. | Total. | |
| Applications considered by Committees during period. | 9,234 | 755 | 393 | 10,382 | 4,568 | 324 | 234 | 5,126 |
| Applications admitted by Committees during period. | 8,109 | 507 | 297 | 8,913 | 3,964 | 167 | 103 | 4,234 |
| Applications recommended for disallowance during period— | ||||||||
| Not normally insurable and not seeking to obtain a livelihood by means of insurable employment. | 33 | 13 | 5 | 51 | 32 | 27 | 4 | 63 |
| Insurable employment not likely to be available. | 68 | 8 | 1 | 77 | 29 | 6 | 1 | 36 |
| Not a reasonable period of insurable employment during the preceding two years. | 450 | 34 | 3 | 487 | 295 | 1 | 2 | 298 |
| Not making every reasonable effort to obtain suitable employment or not willing to accept suitable employment. | 444 | 83 | 18 | 545 | 80 | 34 | 24 | 138 |
| Single persons residing with relatives. | 105 | 78 | 63 | 246 | 124 | 79 | 96 | 299 |
| Married women who could look for support from their husbands. | — | 1 | — | 1 | — | — | — | — |
| Married men who could look for support from their wives. | — | — | — | — | 2 | — | — | 2 |
| Working short time but earning sufficient for maintenance. | 11 | 15 | — | 26 | 2 | 9 | — | 11 |
| Postponed for a definite time. | 14 | 16 | 6 | 36 | 40 | 1 | 4 | 45 |
| Total recommended for disallowance during period. | 1,125 | 248 | 96 | 1,469 | 604 | 157 | 131 | 892 |
| * Statistics of the number of individuals concerned in these applications are not available nor can figures be given showing the number of applications for Standard Benefit disallowed. |
§ 65. Mr. GIBBINSasked the Minister of Labour the number of persons who have been refused benefit in the city of Liverpool for the three months ended 31st October, 1927, and the reasons for such refusal; and, if any have been refused benefit for not accepting employment, the nature and conditions of the work offered?
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLANDAs the reply involves a number of figures in tabular form, I will, if I may, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.
§ and the grounds upon which the claims were disallowed?
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLANDAs the reply includes a number of figures, I will, with the hon. Member's permission, circulate a statement in the OFFICIAL REPORT.
§ Following is the statement:
§ Following is the reply:
§ Out of 40,808 applications for extended benefit considered by the local committees in the Liverpool area during the period 12th July, to 10th October, 1927, 34,348 were recommended for allowance and 6,460 for disallowance. The following statement shows the reasons for such disallowances. Statistics regarding the disallowance of applications for standard benefit are not available.
1031§ As regards the last part of the question, it is not practicable to give this information.
| Applications* for extended benefit recommended for disallowance by local committees in the Liverpool area during the period 12th July to 10th October, 1927. | |
| Reasons for disallowance. | Number of applications recommended for disallowance. |
| Not normally insurable and not seeking to obtain a livelihood by means of insurable employment | 412 |
| Insurable employment not likely to be available | 111 |
| Not a reasonable period of insurable employment during the preceding two years | 3,453 |
| Not making every reasonable effort to obtain suitable employment or not willing to accept suitable employment | 1,366 |
| Single persons residing with relatives | 639 |
| Married women who could look for support from their husbands | 85 |
| Married men who could look for support from their wives | 3 |
| Working short time but earning sufficient for maintenance | 370 |
| Postponed for a definite time | 21 |
| Total recommended for disallowance | 6,460 |
| * Statistics showing the number of separate individuals concerned in these applications are not available. |
§ 68. Mr. NEIL MACLEANasked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that James Haggerty, of 110, Queen Street, Govan, has been refused benefit by the Govan Employment Exchange on the ground that the committee consider he has failed to prove that he is making every reasonable effort to obtain employment suited to his capacities and is will- 1032 ing to accept such employment (Clause 4, U.1. 503); that Haggerty's record of employment from April, 1927, has been from 28th April to 24th June with Barclay, Curie, and Company, Govan; from 28th June to 13th July with Cochrane, Morgan, and Company, Govan; from 18th July to 17th October with Barclay, Curie, and Company, Govan; that his record of stamps for 1927 is 1/27 24 stamps, 2/27 16 stamps, a total of 40 stamps for 45 weeks; whether he will make an inquiry to see if some mistake has been made in this case; or whether, seeing that Haggerty accepted employment during the Glasgow holiday week, and is therefore making reasonable efforts to obtain and is willing to accept employment, he will have this case reconsidered?
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLANDI am having inquiries made in this case, and I will let the hon. Member know the result as soon as possible.