§ 16. Mr. JOHNSTONasked the Secretary of State for Scotland, whether his 1369 attention has been drawn to the case of a firm of quarry masters who were fined £200 at Dumbarton Sheriff Court for failing to stamp the insurance cards of their employés for the period July, 1927, to July, 1928; whether he is aware that the contributions were deducted weekly from the employés wages; that the employés are now informed that they may lose their title to full health and pension benefits unless they themselves stamp their cards in full again for the period in question; and whether, since this means £3 18s. from each workman for no fault of his own and since the State has received the fine of £200; he can take any steps to relieve the workman of this additional impost?
§ Sir J. GILMOURThe answer to the first three parts of the question is in the affirmative. As regards the last part, I have felt justified, after inquiry and consideration of representations submitted to me, in advising reduction of the fine imposed upon one of the partners of the firm from £200 to £50. There is, however, no power to apply fines imposed on employers for contravention of the Insurance Acts to the payment of contributions which they have failed to pay; and I am advised that the financial position of the firm makes it unlikely that it will be found possible to collect arrears of insurance contributions. In the circumstances I regret that the only way of safeguarding the title of the employés concerned to health and pension benefits is that they should stamp the relative contribution cards at their own cost.
§ Mr. JOHNSTONAre we now to understand that the State has taken £50, not £200, but £50, of the fine from this firm, that the State is therefore in pocket, and that the employés, who through no fault of their own are liable to lose their benefits, are now to be called upon to pay a sum of £3 18s. per workman?
§ Sir J. GILMOURNo, Sir. The fact is that the State has not got even £50. It is gravely doubted whether that amount will be paid, but that is the sum which the State might ultimately get. I agree that it is a great hardship upon these individuals, and I have given instructions to the Department to investigate it as far as possible to see whether there is any method of dealing with such a case. I am advised that it will require legislation in order to alter the position.
§ Mr. JOHNSTONWill the right hon. Gentleman in the meantime give instructions to the effect that none of these men will lose any benefit as a result of this action or inaction on the part of the employers while he is making the inquiry?
§ Sir J. GILMOURNo, Sir. I do not think that I have the power to do so.
§ Mr. MACLEANIs this House to understand that the Government cannot safeguard the interests and payments of insured workers when a firm actually puts the deductions which they make from their workmen's wages into their own pockets? How are the workers to be protected from employers? Surely something can be done by, the Government to protect the insurance benefits when they have paid for them?
§ Sir J. GILMOURAs I am instructed, I understand that the individuals concerned can take action on their own behalf against this firm. As is already obvious from the answer which I have given, the hope of their being able to do that is small, but in order to deal with it properly, if the House desires to do so, obviously further legislation will be required.
Sir G. HAMILTONIf this fine of £50 is received by the State, will not my right hon. Friend at least insist on that amount being used to stamp these cards?
§ Sir J. GILMOURI do not think that it is in my power to insist. The State is governed by legislation passed by this House.
Sir G. HAMILTONIs it not possible to introduce a Bill—it could be passed within five minutes—in order to do such an obvious act of justice?
Dr. VERNON DAVIESIs it, or is it not, the duty of insured persons to see that their cards are stamped?
§ Sir J. GILMOURindicated assent.
§ Mr. SKELTONHow could this failure go on for a whole year without being discovered?
§ Sir J. GILMOURI am not in a position to answer that question. Clearly, it is a matter which would require research.
§ Mr. HARDIErose—
§ Mr. SPEAKERWe must pass on to the next question. The hon. Member, if he wishes the matter to be made clear, ought to put another question upon the Paper.