asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce why unemployment insurance benefit has been refused in the cases of Cornelius Maher, Castlekelly, Brittas; James Molloy, Ballymasurney, Brittas; and William Kilbride, Alligour, Tallaght (Register No. 208,244), all of whom had regularly paid insurance contributions for prolonged periods while employed by the Lally Transport Company, and had as many as 70 stamps to credit; and whether he is aware that those men have been signing the register for from sixteen to twenty weeks, and are in great need owing to the delay in paying the benefit that is due.
CEISTEANNA—QUESTIONS. ORAL ANSWERS. - UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE BENEFIT CLAIMS.
When Cornelius Maher, James Molloy and William Kilbride made their claims, the unemployment books lodged at the same time were questioned on the ground that they were not properly stamped. Investigation which has been unavoidably protracted became necessary, and is not yet finally completed in the cases of Cornelius Maher and William Kilbride. Cornelius Maher for the time being has no contributions to his credit in the Unemployment Fund. Those on the book which he lodged with his claim, and which are under investigation, cannot be admitted, for the present at all events. It has been possible to allow benefit on some of the stamps affixed to the book of William Kilbride, and the amount due will be paid next Friday. The remainder are still under investigation, and cannot be admitted at present.
In addition to the question which arose as to the stamping of the book of James Molloy, his claim was in the first instance disallowed under Section 7 (1) (ii) and (iii) on the grounds that he was not unemployed and not unable to obtain suitable employment. He appealed to the Court of Referees for reconsideration of his claim, and the Court recommended that it should be allowed. The Insurance Officer, after further consideration, has accepted the recommendation of the Court, and payment accordingly will be made next Friday of any benefit due to the claimant.
What are the grounds for the dispute as to the validity of the stamps?
That the stamps had been affixed to another unemployment book previously.
Does the Minister suggest that the three persons concerned had any responsibility for that?
It is not my business to make suggestions as to responsibility. At the moment I am only bound to pay on stamps properly affixed. If there is a question of what amounts to fraud, as there is in this case, then benefit cannot be paid on stamps improperly affixed. At the moment the matter is with the State Chemist for investigation and test by him.
Is the Minister aware that these men have been waiting now for more than three months in one or two cases for this question to be solved, and that in the meantime they are without means?
A man would suffer if, in fact, only one stamp had been improperly affixed and that the rest seemed to be correct. Once a claim is made of improperly affixing stamps, and there seems a prima facie case for that, then the whole thing has to be inquired into. There is no possibility of paying on any of the stamps, and the matter is at present under investigation.
asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce whether he will state the reasons for refusing to pay unemployment insurance benefit to Robert Ivors, of Pluckerstown, Kilmeague, County Kildare (Serial Book No. 4704, Droichead Nua Office), who lodged a claim to benefit on the 24th March, 1927.
As stated in reply to a question addressed to me by the Deputy on the same subject on the 20th May last, a claim to benefit made by Robert Ivors, Pluckerstown, Kilmeague, Co. Kildare, on the 24th March, 1927, was disallowed by the insurance officer on the grounds that the statutory conditions specified in Section 7 (1) (ii) and (iii) of the Unemployment Insurance Act, 1920, were not fulfilled. Mr. Ivors appealed against that decision, and the case was referred to the umpire, who has decided that on the facts before him Mr. Ivors' claim must remain disallowed.