HC Deb 06 February 1929 vol 224 cc1751-2
27. Mr. BUCHANAN

asked the Minister of Labour if he is aware that Herbert Ellis was refused benefit for six weeks at the Partick Exchange, Glasgow, on or about 15th December, 1928, for alleged not going to a job on that date, and that he appealed to a court of referees, held at Glasgow on 18th January, 1929; that the court refused benefit, refusing to accept as evidence a note produced by Mr. Ellis from the foreman of the job at which he was to start, stating he would not in any event have got the job as he was not suited for the work; that in their finding they state they do not appreciate the note obtained, as it was given by the foreman because of friendly relations with trade union officials; and, seeing that this casts a reflection on the character of foremen and trade union officials, will he have the case re-heard?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND

The facts are substantially as stated by the hon. Member. There is no power to have cases re-heard unless fresh evidence has come to light, which was not before the statutory authorities when they originally heard the case.

Mr. BUCHANAN

Am I to understand that because trade union officials have developed the Government policy, and arc being friendly with employers and employers' representatives, the workpeople whom they represent are to be deprived of benefit?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND

This decision lay with the independent court. The suggestion that the referee and the umpire or any member of such court, or, as a matter of fact, any officer of my Department, has developed a policy of partiality with one side or the other, is a gross imputation on them, for which there is not a shadow of foundation.

Mr. BUCHANAN

I am asking whether the right hon. Gentleman is aware that the Court of Referees refused to accept the representations of foremen because of alleged friendly relations, and, on the other hand, that the court refused to accept evidence because of alleged enmity between foremen and trade union officials; and will he state if he intends to punish men because their trade union-officials develop friendly relations between the managers and themselves?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND

In this particular case, the House will not think that I want to argue the merits of the case, in which I have no power to intervene, if I say that there are many other circumstances in the case, one of which was that the claimant's main contention was that he was not feeling well enough for work on the day when he ought to Lave returned, but was not so unwell as to be ineligible for benefit.