§ 5. Mr. GORDON MACDONALDasked the Minister of Labour the number of claims for unemployment benefit disallowed by the courts of referees in which the insurance officer has contested the decision by lodging an appeal to the Umpire?
§ Mr. LAWSONDuring the period 14th March, 1930, to 31st December, 1930, decisions were given by the Umpire in 1,171 cases submitted by the insurance officer in which benefit had been disallowed by courts of referees.
§ 6. Mr. MACDONALDasked the Minister of Labour whether she is in a position to state the reason for the high number of claims to unemployment benefits that were disallowed by the court of referees in St. Helens and in Wigan during the period 13th March, 1930, to 12th January, 1931?
§ Mr. LAWSONAs my hon. Friend was informed on 22nd January, 1,263 of the 2,542 claims disallowed at St. Helens, and 2,600 of the 4,414 claims disallowed at Wigan during the period in question, were disallowed on the ground that transitional condition (b) was not satisfied. These figures are mainly due to the large numbers of claims which were made on the passing of the 1930 Act by persons, particularly married women, who could not establish any claim to benefit under the new provisions. Of the 1,263 and 2,600 claims disallowed at St. Helens and Wigan under transitional condition (b), 720 and 1,932, respectively, were made by married women.
§ Mr. McSHANEDoes not that answer of the hon. Member deal with the accusation that is always made that married women get benefit so easily
§ Mr. LAWSONI think that accusation has been made in ignorance of the facts.
§ 11. Mr. MACDONALDasked the Minister of Labour the number of persons disallowed unemployment benefits on the grounds of not genuinely seeking work during the nine months ended 13th March, 1930?
§ Mr. LAWSON151,530 claims to benefit made at Employment Exchanges in Great Britain were disallowed by insurance officers and courts of referees on review after payment of 78 days' benefit during the period in question.
§ 14. Mr. BATEYasked the Minister of Labour if she is aware that John William Kearton, 24, Sandringham Road, Crook, County Durham, 42 years of age and an ex-service man, had his unemployment benefit stopped on 1541 October, 1930, because, owing to his domestic circumstances, he could not go to a training centre; whether there was any reason for stopping his benefit other than his failure to attend the training centre and can she state when his benefit will be renewed?
§ Mr. LAWSONOn the recommendation of the local board of assessors, which, I understand, was fully aware of Mr. Kearton's domestic circumstances, the insurance officer required Mr. Kearton to attend an approved course of instruction. He failed to attend and his claim for benefit was disallowed by a court of referees from and including 1119 16th October. The period of disallowance expired on the 6th January and he is at present receiving benefit.
§ Mr. BATEYDoes the Minister consider that it was reasonable to order a man of 42 years of age to go into a training centre? [HON. MEMBERS: "Why not?"] Would you like to go?
§ Mr. LAWSONThis is a matter which is dealt with by the local assessors and the court of referees, and I understand that the point before the court of referees was that he was expecting work locally.
§ Mr. McSHANEThis is an important matter. Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that in the case of a man 37 years of age going into a training centre he himself sent me an official communication stating that the age limit was 36 and that no person beyond that age would be allowed to go to a training center?
§ Mr. LAWSONI am not aware of the exact terms of that letter, but I am aware that circumstances have changed and that we have to consider the conditions in the different districts. I myself, as a matter of fact, have desired to send a man sometimes as old as 50 years of age to a training centre when the man himself wished to go. Every case has to be dealt with on its merits.