CEISTEANNA—QUESTIONS. ORAL ANSWERS. - UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFIT CLAIMS.

asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce whether he will state the reasons for the delay in the payment at Newbridge Branch Office of unemployment insurance benefit to ex-Company Sergeant Joseph Drewett, Army No. 4117, Rathasker Road, Naas; whether he is aware that claimant lodged his card, Serial No. 7220, with eighteen stamps to his credit for 1922, on the 15th December, 1925, and that, owing to the fact that his name could not be traced in Dublin, his Serial No. was changed to 2663; that he has attended at the Branch Office every week since, a distance of fifteen miles for the double journey, without result, and whether he will expedite investigations in the case.

Joseph Drewett, of Rathasker Road, Naas, claimed unemployment benefit on the 15th December, 1925, but as no contribution had been paid for him since the 1921-22 Insurance Year he was disqualified for the receipt of benefit by the first part of Sub-section 4 of Section 8 of the Act of 1920. It appears that he obtained exemption under Section 3 of the Unemployment Insurance Act, 1920, at the commencement of the operation of the Act, and so has not been an insured contributor. The stamps on the book lodged for 1922 represented the employer's contributions for an exempt person. As Joseph Drewett had not been an insured contributor prior to enlistment, he is not entitled to contributions in respect of his service with the National Army.

Could not the Minister's Department adopt some procedure whereby applicants for insurance benefit would not be kept attending six or seven weeks, walking a distance of fourteen or fifteen miles on each occasion? It is scarcely fair that a man signing on for six or seven weeks should be told at the end that he is not entitled to any benefit.

Does that arise in this case?

I will have that looked into.

asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if he has received a claim for unemployment insurance benefit from Edward Brophy, Clonin, Mountrath, Leix, and if he is prepared to sanction payment of the amount claimed, or state why he is unable to do so.

A claim to unemployment benefit made by Edward Brophy, Clonin, Mountrath, on the 6th April, 1925, was disallowed by the Insurance Officer under Section 7 (1) (ii.) and (iii.) of the Act of 1920, on the grounds that he was "not unemployed" and "not unable to obtain suitable employment." The claimant appealed against the decision to the Court of Referees, which recommended that the claim should be disallowed. The Insurance Officer agreed with this recommendation, and so the claim remains disallowed. Mr. Brophy does not appear to have made any further claim.

asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if he has received a claim for unemployment insurance benefit from Patrick Cooney, Gurteen, Ballickmoyler, Leix (Carlow area); whether he is prepared to sanction payment as claimed, or state the reason why he is unable to do so.

A claim to unemployment benefit made by Patrick Cooney, of Gurteen, Ballickmoyler, Leix, on the 13th of November last was disallowed by the Insurance Officer under Section 7 (1) (ii.) and (iii.) of the Unemployment Insurance Act, 1920, on the grounds that he was "not unemployed" and "not unable to obtain suitable employment." The complainant appealed to the Court of Referees against the decision, and the appeal was heard at Kilkenny on the 21st instant. The Court's recommendation has not yet reached the Insurance Officer.