HC Deb 17 June 1937 vol 325 cc525-9
3. Mr. E. Smith

asked the Minister of Labour whether he will take steps to implement the promise made by the Prime Minister in October, 1931, that if the cost of living increased, unemployment benefit would be increased?

The Minister of Labour (Mr. Ernest Brown)

The hon. Member has been good enough to give me certain references, but nevertheless I have been unable to trace any record of such a promise.

Mr. Smith

Did the right hon. Gentleman hear the speech and, if so, did he not get the impression that it indicated what is stated in the question?

Mr. Brown

It is not an impression. It is a very definite thing, and there is no definite thing in the speech.

Mr. Gallacher

Will the Minister now make such a promise?

Mr. Paling

Is it unusual not to be able to trace the Prime Minister's promises?

Mr. Brown

I did not put the question down.

4. Mr. E. Smith

asked the Minister of Labour whether he has considered the resolution from the Manchester and District Employment Committee urging him to increase unemployment benefit by 1s. 6d. a week for adult unemployed and 1s. a week for dependants, and pointing out that the cost-of-living figure in 1934 was 38 points above the 1914 level and is now 52 points; and what action it is proposed to take?

Mr. Brown

Under the Unemployment Insurance Act, 1934, it is possible to consider the increase of rates of unemployment benefit only when the Unemployment Insurance Statutory Committee have reported that there is a disposable surplus in the fund sufficient for the purpose. In accordance with the Act, the committee will submit a further report upon the financial condition of the Unemployment Fund before the end of February next.

Mr. Smith

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that some of the people who are on standard benefit are being forced to go to public assistance in order to enable them to manage? Will he also bear in mind that this committee is composed of representatives of employers and employés, and they have requested that it should be dealt with?

Mr. Brown

I am also aware that there are representatives of the employers and employed on the Statutory Committee. I am also aware that an unprecedented number of improvements have taken place in the last two years.

Mr. Maxton

Cannot the Statutory Committee report before February next?

Mr. Brown

They report mice a year before February, but of course if there is any danger of the insolvency of the fund, or any other reason, they may report more frequently.

Mr. Maxton

If there is any danger of an unwieldy surplus, could not they report also?

Mr. Brown

There is no unwieldy surplus.

Mr. Maxton

I thought the right hon. Gentleman had been swaggering about it upstairs.

Mr. Brown

It is a delightful thing that we have a good balance in hand.

Mr. Graham White

Is it not always open to recipients of statutory benefit to, apply in case of necessity for a supple- mentary grant from the Unemployment Assistance Board?

Mr. Brown

Certainly.

Mr. Thorne

Is it not a well-known fact that you do not spend money; you save it?

Mr. Brown

It is also a fact that if you spend more than you receive you are in trouble.

6. Mr. E. J. Williams

asked the Minister of Labour whether the index figure of the cost of living was taken as a factor in deciding the scales of allowances under the Unemployment Assistance Regulations?

Mr. E. Brown

The cost of living and all other factors were taken into consideration.

Table showing the approximate amounts of Unemployment Benefit and Transitional Payments or Unemployment Allowances paid direct through Employment Exchanges situated in Monmouthshire, Brecknockshire, Glamorganshire and Carmarthenshire during each year since 1931.
Monmouthshire. Brecknockshire. Glamorganshire. Carmarthenshire.
Year. Insurance Berefit. Transitional Payments and Unemployment Allowances. Insurance Benefit. Transitional Payments and Unemployment Allowances. Insurance Benefit. Transitional Payments and Unemployment Allowances. Insurance Benefit. Transitional Payments and Unemployment Allowances.
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ £
1931 1,510,000 101,000 108,000 10,000 5,354,000 358,000 431,000 21,000
1932 700,000 1,098,000 43,000 92,000 2,246,009 3,558,000 213,000 199,000
1933 512,000 1,296,000 30,000 117,000 1,700,000 4,067,000 141,000 204,000
1934 446,000 1,259,000 30,000 118,000 1,800,000 4,109,000 173,000 194,000
1935 492,000 1,290,000 33,000 113,000 2,078,000 4,475,000 230,000 244,000
1936 (53 weeks). 548,000 1,217,000 40,000 111,000 1,904,000 4,546,000 221,000 245,000
1937 (22 weeks.) 148,000 424,000 13,000 41,000 499,000 1,670,000 126,000 99,000

NOTES:—(a) The figures are exclusive of payments made through Associations, for which a geographical analysis is not available.

(b) The figures relating to insurance benefit for 1931 include transitional benefit for the period prior to 12th November, 1931, when the Transitional Payments Scheme came into operation.

(c) The Transitional Payments Scheme was superseded by the Unemployment Assistance Scheme as from 7th January, 1935.

(d) For 1936 and 1937 the figures include benefit paid under the Agricultural Scheme.

(e) Comparison of the figures for 1937 with those for earlier periods is affected by the extension of the Unemployment Assistance Scheme as from the Second Appointed Day, 1st April, 1937.

11. Mr. Batey

asked the Minister of Labour the number of unemployed who have been taken from the Poor Law by the Unemployment Assistance Board in Great Britain and also in the County of Durham; and the numbers refused up to the latest available date?

Mr. Brown

As the reply includes a table of figures, I will, with the hon. Member's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Mr. Williams

Has the right hon. Gentleman taken into consideration that the cost of living has substantially increased since 1934–35, and will he instruct the board to increase the allowance?

Mr. Brown

The hon. Member will realise that the average payment now is higher by 2s. per applicant than in 1934.

7. Mr. Williams

asked the Minister of Labour what amount of money was expended in benefit and allowances, respectively, for the counties of Monmouth, Brecon, Glamorgan, and Carmarthen since 1931 and each year to date?

Mr. Brown

As the reply includes a table of figures, I will, if I may, circulate a statement in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the statement:

Following is the reply:

Information in respect of local government areas is not available, but the following table shows, in respect of Great Britain and the Unemployment Assistance Board's administrative district of Durham, as on 28th May, in column (1) the number of persons in receipt of public assistance prior to the Second Appointed Day who had made applications for unemployment assistance allowances and who were taken over from public assistance authorities, and in column (2) the number of such applicants held to be outside the scope of the Unemployment Assistance Act.

—— Column (1). Column (2).
Great Britain 90,237 43,689
Durham District. 2,775 1,464

Note.—Durham District includes the Board's administrative areas of Bishop Auckland, Chester - le - Street, Consett, Crook, Durham, Horden, Houghton-leSpring, Pallion, Spennymoor and Sunderland (1) and (2).

16. Mr. Buchanan

asked the Minister of Labour the number of persons who had been employed with Messrs. Dixons, Limited, Govan Iron Works, Gorbals, in the past three years, and when their period of employment had finished with the above firm were reported to the Ministry of Labour by them as having left voluntarily or committed some form of alleged misconduct; in how many cases benefit was allowed by the insurance officer; how many allowed by the court of referees; and how many were refused benefit?

Mr. Brown

I regret that this information is not available.

Mr. Buchanan

Cannot the information be made available? Cannot we have the exchange figures of the men who were refused benefit?

Mr. Brown

It would involve an examination of the whole of the figures to find out facts about a large number of men.

Mr. Buchanan

Is it not the fact that the records of this firm show that a tremendous number of men have been sent to the Employment Exchange for alleged misconduct, and will not the right hon. Gentleman find out what number have been dealt with in the last 12 months?

Mr. Brown

I have said that information is not available, but if the hon. Member wants to bring any particular grievances to my notice I shall be glad to have them.