Vol. 302 No. 3
asked the Minister for Social Welfare why seasonal female employees of Butlins Holiday Camp,
Mosney, County Meath, who are married or widowed and who have signed for unemployment benefit have been disallowed, although this class of worker has been paid unemployment benefit in all previous years.
Claims for unemployment benefit from seasonal employees who had been employed in Butlin's Holiday Camp were submitted to deciding officers of my Department who held in the majority of cases that the claimants were not available for employment other than as seasonal workers with the said employer and were thereby not entitled to unemployment benefit. As deciding officers are independent in the exercise of their statutory functions it would not be proper for me to comment on these decisions. However, the decision in each case was taken, as is required, in the light of the claimant's circumstances with particular reference to the efforts which the claimant had made to seek employment. In general, it can be said that those whose claims were disallowed had confined their employment experience over a number of years to the particular employment in question for a limited period each year and there was insufficient evidence to show to the satisfaction of the deciding officers that the claimants were interested in securing employment outside those periods or with any other employers. Those who did show such evidence were in general allowed benefit.
The persons concerned have been notified of their right of appeal.
The Minister says that it was a decision taken by the deciding officers and no influence could be exerted by his Department but some of these people have been drawing benefit for 29 years, 20 years under Fianna Fáil Governments and 9 years under Coalition Governments and this is the first time they have been disqualified. Would the Minister explain how that has happened? Is this the idea behind the Fianna Fáil promise in their manifesto when they proposed to give equal rights to female recipients of social welfare benefits or has this been done on the recommendation of the Minister for Economic Planning and Development who said last January that £30 million would be saved on social welfare?
This supplementary question is quite different from the original question.
No, sir.
Absolutely.
I want to know why it is that female employees, including widows, have been disqualified. One widow who raised 17 children has been disqualified for the first time. Are we to take it that Fianna Fáil have decided that part-time workers are not to be given benefits?
Fianna Fáil decided nothing about these cases. The cases were decided by a deciding officer in accordance with the normal statutory provisions.
Can the Minister say why people who have been qualified for 29 years have been disqualified this year if there has not been a change in the statutory provisions? Are we to take it that people who can only get part-time work are not entitled to benefit?
I have indicated clearly in my reply the reasons why this particular category of persons has been disallowed unemployment benefit by a deciding officer and an appeals officer. There is nothing I can do about the matter. These officers exercise their statutory functions. I was not aware of what was happening and I have no function in regard to the exercise of their powers by these officers.
Does the Minister not agree that it would appear to the people concerned, and to me, that there must have been a Government decision on this matter, otherwise they would not have changed a social welfare policy that has been in operation for a long time? I have great respect for the way in which the social welfare officers carry out their duties.
I assure the House, the people concerned and the Deputy that there was not a Government decision on the matter; that the matter was not known to me or to the Government until this question was put down.
Deputy John Boland.
Does the Minister not agree that it appears to be so?
I am calling the next question. We are entering into an argument and the Deputy is too experienced not to know that this is disorderly.
I have heard that the Chair has been accused in the past of protecting Ministers. I am not suggesting that the present Ceann Comhairle would do that, but I should hate to be prevented from asking a question.
The Chair is the judge of what is disorderly and what is not disorderly. I have already called the next question.
The presiding officer and the appeals officer can always reconsider any case if new evidence or new circumstances are brought to light.
In view of the unsatisfactory answer, I propose to raise the matter on the adjournment.
The Chair will communicate with the Deputy.
