asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if he will state the cause of the delay by the Umpire in dealing with awards made to unemployed persons by the Board of Referees; and, further, if he is aware that the Umpire has held up the claims of James Reid, 5 Bridge Street. Athlone, and Mrs. Kate O'Reilly, Ball Alley Lane, Athlone, and whether as those two claimants have been granted benefits by the Board of Referees in Athlone, more than six months ago, he will have payment expedited.
CEISTEANNA—QUESTIONS. ORAL ANSWERS. - UMPIRE'S AWARDS IN WESTMEATH.
SEAN O LAIDHIN
andCOMMERCE (Mr. McGilligan): I cannot find that there is any ground for the suggestion that the Umpire delays his decision on claims to unemployment benefit submitted to him.
In the case of James Reid, of Athlone, I find that it has not been sent to the Umpire. In consequence of certain facts which came to light during the necessary investigations into the case, the papers have been referred to the Chief State Solicitor.
In the case of Mrs. Kate O'Reilly, of Ball Alley Lane, Athlone, as the Deputy has already been informed in a letter sent to him on the 21st November last, a claim made by Mrs. O'Reilly on the 4th November, 1924, was disallowed under Section 7 (1) (iii) of the Unemployment Insurance Act, 1920. The claimant appealed to the Court of Referees, which recommended that the claim should be disallowed. The Insurance Officer agreed with the recommendation of the Court, but Mrs. O'Reilly subsequently appealed to the Umpire, who confirmed the decision. She lodged a further claim to benefit on the 26th March, 1925, which had to be disallowed, no contributions having been paid for her since March, 1923. She was notified on each occasion of the disallowance of the claims. Investigations of an earlier claim on which, contrary to the provisions of the Unemployment Insurance Acts, she received benefit in a period in which she was also in receipt of sickness benefit under the National Health Insurance Acts necessarily caused delay in the Department in dealing with the claim of 4th November, 1924, and there was further delay at the Court of Referees because Mrs. O'Reilly was not able to attend the Court for some time. The Umpire's decision, however, was not delayed.
Is the Minister aware that some decisions or findings of the Board of Referees are very often held up by the Umpire for over six months? Surely, a worker who goes before the Board of Referees, who has paid his insurance, who is entitled to benefit and whose claim has been disallowed by the manager of the Labour Exchange should not have his case delayed when it comes to the Umpire, for six months. If the Ministers found themselves in the same position, there would be no smiles.
I am only smiling at the two cases which the Deputy has chosen to refer to. Ordinarily, there is no delay, but in this case there was a certain amount of delay. In one case, the papers have been sent to the Chief State Solicitor and a prosecution for fraud will follow. In the other case, the lady has been allowed off without a prosecution for fraud, because we found that she did not know what she was doing.