I ask for leave to introduce a Bill entitled "An Act to amend the Unemployment Insurance Acts, 1920 to 1924, and for purposes connected therewith." The purposes of the measure are mainly administrative.
UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE BILL, 1926—FIRST STAGE.
I think it is disappointing to hear those last few words. When I saw this notice on the Order Paper to-day I was greatly relieved with the thought that the Minister was proposing to deal with the problem of unemployment insurance by way of extending unemployment insurance. Now we hear from him that it is mainly administrative, and I can only express my deep disappointment at that sentence.
Would the Minister say whether he proposes to deal in the Bill with the difficulties that have arisen owing to the refusal to give unemployment benefits to those who are adjudged to be small farmers but who really are road-workers?
That is not one of the provisions of the proposed Bill.
Would the Minister include agricultural labourers and make them eligible for unemployment benefit?
Mr. P. HOGAN (Clare):
Is the Minister aware that there are voluminous objections to the existing Acts in respect to small farmers and road-workers, whose contributions have been taken by county councils, and is not that volume of objection sufficient to warrant some alteration in the administration of the Act?
I am moving for leave to introduce a particular Bill mainly of an administrative nature. What its provisions are will be seen, if leave is given to introduce it, when it is circulated, and it will then be open to Deputies to move amendments.
What is the use of moving amendments when the Minister has his voting machine behind him?
And when Deputies are prevented by Standing Orders from doing so.
The Minister has on all occasions the majority of Deputies behind him to reject any amendment of which he does not approve. In the Acts agricultural labourers are excluded from benefit and, as Deputy O'Connell says, a man who may be working four or five acres is not entitled to benefit although he is requested by the county council, when working on the roads, to pay contributions.
I was not aware that the Minister was so infallible in the matter of unemployment insurance.
I am moving for leave to introduce a certain type of Bill.
Mr. P. HOGAN
And you say that this matter is not dealt with in the Bill.
Deputy Johnson thought that it was a Bill for the further extension of unemployment insurance benefits. It is not that definitely, and that type of Bill would be entirely different to the type of Bill spoken of here. That would depend on a very much bigger series of considerations and on very much more important decisions than have been taken in regard to this Bill. Deputy Lyons asks about agricultural labourers and raises a point which my Department has tried to explain to him in numerous letters and which I myself have tried to explain to him by Parliamentary question and answer, but he has apparently not yet discovered the distinction. If he moves to have agricultural labourers included he is asking for a very big decision. At the same time he is asking for a decision which will involve certain contributions from farmers, and, considering the fact that the Deputy supported the farmers last night in a particular vote, I wonder will he now get the support of the farmers on this matter.
The Deputy did not vote last night.
Support can be accorded in other ways than by voting. There are certain people who say things but who do not act up to them when it comes to voting.
I supported the amendment against high taxation and against fleecing the people whom we are supposed to represent.
Leave given to introduce. Bill read a First Time.
Second Stage ordered for April 20th.