§ Mr. DENNISONasked the Minister of Labour how many men and women, 1343W respectively, were on the Unemployment Exchange register in the city of Birmingham for the years 1922, 1923 and 1924; the total amount of unemployment benefit paid for the same periods in that city; and how many of these were ex-service men?
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLANDThe following is the answer:—
Date (end of Month). Number recorded as unemployed on the register of the Exchanges* in the area of the City of Birmingham. Men. Women. 1922. March 49,505 22,409 June 46,642 16,800 September 46,119 15,851 December 40,216 11,449 1923. March 31,817 9,895 June 32,186 9,365 September 30,830 9,997 December 28,838 9,729 1924. March 22,616 8,552 June 22,036 7,725 September 27,565 10,435 December 22,316 9,454 *Including Birmingham, Aston, Handsworth, Selly Oak and Sparkhill. Regular periodic information as to the number of ex-service men included in the above figures is not available, but, at a special census taken on 29th March, 1924, there were found to be 7,969 men of this category registered as unemployed in this area. The approximate amounts of unemployment benefit (including an estimated figure for benefit paid through associations) paid in the same area in the years 1922, 1923 and 1924 were £2,230,000, £1,490,000 and £1,300,000, respectively.
§ Mr. DENNISONasked the Minister of Labour how many unemployed received unemployment benefit in the city of Birmingham during the month of December last; how many for the two completed months of 1925; how many have failed to qualify for unemployment benefit owing to the new Regulations increasing the number of stamps required; how many of the latter were ex-service men; and how many were over 55 years of age?
1344W
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLANDThe numbers of applicants for benefit who were recorded on the registers of the five Employment Exchanges in the city of Birmingham at the end of December, January and February last were 31,448, 30.173 and 28,124 respectively. I am unable to state the number of separate individuals represented by these figures, but it is was no doubt considerably larger than the number on the register at any particular date. The number of persons in this area whose claims to benefit have been disallowed since 19th February, because of failure to satisfy the contribution conditions referred to, was 246. I am unable to give the ages of these persons, nor am I able to state the number of ex-service men included in the figures.