asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if he will state why the claim of James Doherty, Porthall, Clonleigh, County Donegal, to unemployment assistance has not yet been determined by the Court of Referees to which it has been referred on appeal.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Donegal Unemployment Assistance Claim.
It was necessary to have certain enquiries made for the purpose of determining whether the applicant to whom the question refers satisfied the conditions for the receipt of unemployment assistance. On the completion of those enquiries the unemployment assistance officer instead of himself determining the application referred it to the Court of Referees in accordance with the provisions of Section 20 (2) of the Unemployment Assistance Act, 1933. There was no appeal by the applicant himself. The case was considered by the court on the 25th May and the court's recommendation that the application be refused on the ground that the applicant was not genuinely seeking employment (Section 15 (1) (b) ) has been accepted by the unemployment assistance officer.
Is the Minister aware that the finding was based on the allegation that the man had been offered work, which was true, but that the work required him to travel seven miles every morning from his home to the scene of operations and seven miles back in the evening. Is there any means of defining for the Court of Referees what this House intended by a reasonable offer of work? Is the Minister prepared to say if he considers that an offer of work that involved a man travelling 14 miles each day on a bicycle is a reasonable offer of work, and such as to justify the finding that he was not genuinely seeking employment?
I am not so aware. The matter is entirely one for the Court of Referees.
I know that. I know that the Minister has no administrative check on the court in any decision that they come to. But will the Minister define what he considers a reasonable offer of work? Will he say that in his opinion an offer of work which involves a man travelling 14 miles per day in order to get that work is not a reasonable offer of work within the meaning of the Act?
I have no such function under the Act.
I am aware of that. But surely it is the Minister's duty to assist us in getting the purpose of legislation passed by this House carried into effect by introducing amending legislation. My contention is that findings such as in this case are not reproducing what this House intended. If the Minister finds the facts are, as I have stated, will he consider introducing amending legislation for the purpose of defining what genuinely seeking employment means?