asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if he is aware that the annual reserve allowance of reservists of the National Army is calculated at the rate of 5/3 per week for the purpose of means under the Unemployment Assistance Act, 1933, and that a deduction of 3/- per week is made in assessing the rate of unemployment assistance to be paid in any particular case; if he will state on what basis this calculation is arrived at; if he is aware, that, owing to illness, accident or some such reason, reservists may be unable to attend for annual training and consequently would not be entitled to receive reserve pay, and if to prevent hardship he will issue instructions that in the case of National Army reservists reserve pay will not in future be taken into account in calculating means under the Act.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Army Reservists and Means Test.
An applicant for a qualification certificate who is dissatisfied with the determination by an unemployment assistance officer of his application, has a statutory right to have his case considered and determined by the Unemployment Appeals Committee constituted in accordance with the Act. The decision of this committee is final and conclusive. The case of a reservist of the class specified in the question has been considered by the Unemployment Appeals Committee who determined that the weekly rate of his means, corresponding to the yearly rate, calculated in accordance with the Act is 4/11. Any cases of reservists in which prior to this decision rates of means in excess of 4/11 per week have been assessed will be adjusted. If for any reason a reservist lost his allowance, it would, of course, be open to him to have his qualification certificate revised in respect of means.
In regard to the last part of the question, I am not prepared to issue instructions of the kind indicated by the Deputy.
Is the Minister aware that there is a good deal of dissatisfaction arising from the method adopted in calculating means under the Act? Does he not consider it a hardship, in the case of a reservist with a wife and three children, who is paying 14/- weekly in rent, and who had been, under the able-bodied relief scheme, receiving 22/- a week, that his payment under the unemployed assistance scheme should be 17/6, which is 4/6 less than the amount of the outdoor relief he had been receiving, and that he should lose a further 3/- now in case he is called up for training and, in case he is not called up, should still suffer that loss? I would ask the Minister if he would have this matter reconsidered by his Department.
I cannot hold out any hope of any further reconsideration.