§ 3. Mr. R. GIBSONasked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that the assistance drawn by Neil Cannie, 160, Rankine Street, Greenock, from the Employment Exchange has been reduced from 17s. per week to 9s. per week; and whether this reduction is due to the application of the new regulations, or, if not, on what grounds it was made?
§ Mr. E. BROWNI am informed by the Unemployment Assistance Board that the reduction in the allowance was not a consequence of the new regulations, but was due to a change in the circumstances of the household.
§ Mr. T. WILLIAMSCan the right hon. Gentleman say whether the area officers have been notified that they can make these reductions immediately and whether they have any power to do so?
§ Mr. G. HARDIEIs the Minister aware that in this case, in the papers which were issued, the impression was given that the new regulations were being applied so as to produce reductions?
§ 5. Mr. JAMES GRIFFITHSasked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that the Unemployment Assistance Board is rejecting the claims for unemployment allowance made by single men in cases where such men have left their homes because, by the operation of the household means test, they have been given nil determination, and have subsequently left their homes and have taken lodgings elsewhere; and whether he proposes to take steps to revise the regulations in this respect so as to avoid producing a number of vagabonds driven from home by the means test and deprived of any form of public assistance?
§ Mr. BROWNI am informed that cases occasionally arise in which as a merely colourable arrangement a single man leaves or purports to leave his home for the purpose of obtaining an allowance at a higher rate than would otherwise be payable, and that in such cases the 2138 Board's officer may make an assessment on the basis that the applicant's home is still in fact open to him and that he is constructively a member of it. If in any instance the facts on which the officer has proceeded are in doubt or dispute, it is open to the aggrieved applicant to exercise his right of appeal under the Act.
§ Mr. GRIFFITHSAm I to understand that the decision as to whether a single man is to stay at home or is to leave his home, is not to be in his own individual right but is to be a decision of the Unemployment Assistance Board; and is not this an infringement of the rights of the working-man?
§ Mr. LAWSONWill the right hon. Gentleman say under what regulation the Unemployment Assistance Board refuses to give a man unemployment assistance after he has left home?
§ Mr. LAWSONThe right hon. Gentleman has answered to the effect that this has happened regularly, and surely as he is Minister of Labour and as this is an exceptional case he will know that there is no regulation—[HON. MEMBERS: "Speech!"] Will the Minister answer that point?
§ Mr. BROWNThe hon. Gentleman says that I said that this happened regularly, but I said no such thing. I have said that cases occasionally arise. There have been a few, but there are rights of appeal, and they are decided in the light of the regulations.
§ Mr. J. GRIFFITHSArising out of the Minister's second reply, in which he said that the fact that the allowances are being denied to these men is due to collusive action, may I ask whether that statement is based upon the facts in each case? If that is not the case, and I know it is not, will the Minister withdraw that insult to working men?
§ Mr. BROWNI have nothing to withdraw. I said there were occasional cases of colourable arrangements.
§ Mr. SPEAKERMr. Buchanan.
§ Mr. GRIFFITHSOn a point of Order. May I ask whether the Minister is entitled to use words which are insulting to applicants without any evidence of fact at all? Further, may I, in view not only of the Minister's unsatisfactory reply but also in view of the reflection cast upon my constituents, give notice that I will raise this matter on the first opportunity?
§ Mr. BUCHANANMay I ask the right hon. Gentleman—
§ Mr. SPEAKERIt is very unusual to pursue a question when notice has been given of an hon. Member's intention to raise it on a future occasion.
§ Mr. BUCHANANOn a point of Order. I understood that I had been called by you, Mr. Speaker.
§ Mr. SPEAKERMr. Taylor.
§ 6. Mr. R. J. TAYLORasked the Minister of Labour the nature of the arrangements made with regard to the rent allowance by the various advisory committees in Northumberland?
§ Mr. BROWNI will, with the permission of the hon. Member, circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT a statement showing the recommendations for the adjustment of allowances in respect of rent which have been made by the four advisory committees whose districts includes parts of the geographical county of Northumberland. The committees have been informed that the board have instructed their local officers to give effect to the recommendations in applying the new Regulations.
§ Following is the Statement:
§ A. Each of the four Advisory Committees has recommended that for the purposes of sub-paragraphs (2) (a) of paragraph 1 of the First Schedule to the Unemployment Assistance (Determination of Need and Assessment of Needs) Regulations, 1936, the amounts ascertained under sub-paragraph (1) of paragraph 1 of the Schedule should be increased as follows:
§ Where the net rent is greater than one-quarter of the total of the scale rates of all members of the household the amount ascertained as aforesaid 2140 should be increased by the lesser of the two following sums:
- (a) the amount by which the net rent is greater than one-quarter of the scale rates;
- (b) the difference between one-quarter and one-third of the scale rates.
§ Note.—In considering cases in which the rent paid may be in excess of one-third of the scale rates of the household the board's officers have been instructed to deal with each case on its merits and in appropriate cases to make such further adjustments as the circumstances may justify.
§ B. The Committees' recommendations for the adjustment of allowances where the net rent is less than one-quarter of the total scale rates of all members of the household are as follows:
§ (a)Newcastle and District Advisory Committee.
§ The amounts ascertained under subparagraph (1) of paragraph 1 of the Schedule should be decreased if, and to the extent that, the difference between the net rent and one-quarter of the scale rates exceeds 1s. 6d.;
§ (b)Tynemouth, Wallsend and District Advisory Committee.
§ The amounts ascertained under subparagraph (1) of paragraph 1 of the Schedule should be decreased if, and to the extent that, the difference between the net rent and one-quarter of the scale rates exceeds 2s.;
§ (c)Blaydon, Hexham and District Advisory Committee.
§ The amounts ascertained under subparagraph (1) of paragraph 1 of the Schedule should be decreased if, and to the extent that, the difference between the net rent and one-quarter of the scale rates exceeds 2s. 6d., provided that in the case of an applicant living under predominantly rural conditions a reduction should be made to the extent that the net rent is less than one-quarter of the scale rates;
§ (d)North - East Northumberland Advisory Committee.
§ The amounts ascertained under subparagraph (1) of paragraph 1 of the Schedule should be decreased if, and to the extent that, the difference between the net rent and one-quarter of the 2141 scale rates exceeds 3s., provided that in the case of an applicant living in a rent free house no deduction in respect of rent should be made in excess of 5s.
§ 16. Mr. LAWSONasked the Minister of Labour how many applicants' claims have been received by the Unemployment Assistance Board; and whether he can state the numbers who have received increases and have suffered decreases, respectively?
§ Mr. BROWNThe re-assessment of cases under the new Regulations has not yet been completed. Up to date reports relating to 504,526 cases so re-assessed have been received by the board. In about 395,000 of these cases there has been no change of circumstances since the last assessment prior to the coming into operation of the new Regulations, and in rather more than one-third of these the rates of payment have been increased while in the remainder they remain unchanged. In the balance of about 109,000 cases there has been some change of circumstances and there is therefore no direct comparison of the effect of the new Regulations; but the statistics received indicate that the proportion of these in which the rate of payment was increased as compared with that which would have been made previously was not less than one-third. No reductions have yet been made on account of the new Regulations.
§ Mr. BUCHANANCan the Minister tell us what proportion would have received a decrease if the Regulations had been applied?
§ Mr. BUCHANANThe Minister can tell us the number who were to receive an increase, and why cannot he tell us the number who would have received a decrease if the Regulations had been in force?
§ Mr. BROWNThe hon. Member knows that that depends upon how they are applied over a period of 18 months by 126 local advisory committees.
§ Mr. GRAHAM WHITEDo the figures as to the proportionate decrease include the nil determinations?
§ Mr. R. J. TAYLORIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that what he has stated shows that there has only been a decrease where there has been a change of circumstance, and can he say whether there have been any decreases apart from change of circumstances?
17. Miss RATHBONEasked the Minister of Labour whether the scale of assistance laid down in the regulations of the Unemployment Assistance Board has taken into account the cost of a minimum diet necessary for health, as estimated by the nutrition committee of the British Medical Association or by any other scientific authority, and the cost of other primary needs; and, if not, upon what other considerations has the scale been fixed?
§ Mr. BROWNI am satisfied that in drafting the Regulations which have recently come into force with the approval of this House the Unemployment Assistance Board had regard to the considerations referred to by the hon. Member.
Miss RATHBONEIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that the actual determination falls short of minimum subsistence needs as estimated, whether by the British Medical Association or by any other authorities, by amounts which become more and more substantial according to the number in the family and in what sense, therefore, have these estimates been considered?
§ Mr. G. GRIFFITHSIs the Minister aware that the Secretary of State for War has decided to change the diet in the Army and will he change the diet out of the Army?