HC Deb 26 November 1925 vol 188 cc1623-4W

asked the Minister of Labour why he disallowed unemployment benefit to Mr. J. A. Burton, 9, Surtees Street, Darlington, on the grounds that he was residing with a brother who is in receipt of a disability pension of £2 10s. a week, in consequence of having lost both legs in the War?


I am having inquiries made into this case, and will let the hon. Member know the result as soon as possible.


asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that the Sherburn House Colliery workmen, who were refused unemployment benefit, have now agreed to accept the owners' terms, but the colliery is not to be re-opened; and whether he will now consider their claim to be paid unemployment insurance benefit?


I understand that the colliery was to re-open to-day, and that some of the men will start work at once. The eligibility for benefit of the men who do not or cannot start work as soon as the colliery opens is a matter for decision by the usual statutory machinery, and I understand the matter is under consideration.


asked the Minister of Labour whether he can state the number of persons who have been refused unemployment benefit at the Cradley Heath and Brierley Hill Employment Exchanges respectively since the 1st of October this year to date, and the number of vacancies filled by those Exchanges during the same period?


pursuant to his reply [OFFICIAL REPORT, 25th November, 1925, cols. 1354–5], supplied the following statement:

During the period 13th October to 16th November, 168 applications for extended benefit were refused at Cradley Heath and 65 at Brierley Hill. I am unable to state the number of refusals of applications for standard benefit. During the period 29th September to 16th November 183 vacancies were filled by the Cradley Heath Employment Exchange and 121 by the Brierley Hill Exchange.