§ 7 and 8. Mr. Leslie Haleasked the Minister of National Insurance (1) whether he is aware that Oldham unemployed cotton workers, who were unemployed throughout Holy Week, are being made to pay for a 3s. 8d. stamp on their cards on the ground that they are not unemployed for a whole week because Good Friday is a holiday; and if he will amend his Regulations to remove this hardship;
(2) whether he is aware that Oldham unemployed cotton workers, who were unemployed throughout Easter week, are being made to pay for a 3s. 8d. stamp on their cards on the ground that they are not unemployed for a whole week because Easter Monday is a holiday; and if he will amend his Regulations to remove this hardship.
§ Mr. PeakeMy attention has been drawn to this effect of the present Regulations and I am looking into the matter.
§ Mr. HaleIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that I am very much obliged for that reply, if he is going to look into it with his customary benevolence? I hope that he will do so, because it represents a very serious hardship and one which requires somewhat urgent attention.
§ Mr. PeakeYes, Sir. The hon. Member has a good point here. I am looking into it with all possible despatch. It does arise from Regulations made in 1948 by one of my predecessors.
§ Mr. HaleIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that my points are normally good and, had I raised this in 1949 with his predecessor, I am quite certain that immediate action would have been taken?
§ 9. Mr. Haleasked the Minister of National Insurance why Oldham workers who have put 3s. 8d. stamps upon their cards in respect of periods in which they 6 were not wholly unemployed or in periods of voluntary absence for personal reasons, are being told that the 3s. 8d. stamp does not qualify them for National Health or unemployment benefit.
§ Mr. PeakeContributions as a non-employed person do not normally give cover for unemployment and sickness benefit but may do so where there is a good record of contributions as an employed or self-employed person during the same contribution year. If the hon. Member will send me details of any case in which misleading information seems to have been given, I will look into it.
§ Mr. HaleIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that the case in question is one where 15 stamps were put on consecutively during a period of absence and, apart from that, the normal stamps had been affixed consecutively for more than 20 years without a loss of any week except holiday weeks?
§ Mr. PeakeYes, but in the case to which the hon. Member refers the lady in question had absented herself voluntarily from work for a period of 15 weeks. The effect was not to disentitle her to these benefits but slightly to reduce the amount of benefit to which she was entitled.
§ Mr. HaleIt was reduced by 10s. a week; but will the right hon. Gentleman look into this and see why advice is not given at the time, because that would have saved her an incredible hardship?