asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if he will state why unemployment benefit has been refused to William Neill (Book No. 999, Killinure, Tullow).
CEISTEANNA—QUESTIONS. ORAL ANSWERS. - CLAIMS TO UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFIT.
William Neill, Killinure, Tullow (Unemployment Insurance Book No. Tullow/999) made a claim to unemployment insurance benefit on the 1st of February, 1928.
His claim was disallowed by the Insurance Officer under Section 7 (I) (ii) and 7 (I) (iii) of the Unemployment Insurance Act, 1920, on the ground that he was "not unemployed" and "not unable to obtain suitable employment." He was notified of the disallowance and of his statutory right of appeal to a Court of Referees, on the 22nd ultimo, but up to the present he has not appealed.
asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if he will state why unemployment benefit has been refused to John Murphy, Seskin, Tinahely, County Wicklow (Book No. 1083, Tullow).
John Murphy, Seskin, Tinahely, County Wicklow (Unemployment Insurance Book No. Tullow/ 1083), made a claim to unemployment insurance benefit on the 16th of January, 1928.
His claim was disallowed by the Insurance Officer under Sections 7 (I) (ii) and 7 (I) (iii) of the Unemployment Act, 1920, on the ground that he was "not unemployed" and "not unable to obtain suitable employment." He was notified of the disallowance and of his right of appeal to a Court of Referees within twenty-one days from the date of receipt of notification of the disallowance, but he did not exercise that right. In the circumstances benefit is not payable on the claim.
Arising out of the Parliamentary Secretary's answer, is he aware that these men are not benefited under Section 7—that because they have a few acres of land they are not entitled to a donation? They would never be entitled to a donation, and in view of that will the Parliamentary Secretary consider refunding to this man the amount of the contributions that have been taken from him?
Each case, as the Deputy is aware, is investigated on its merits. The law is quite clear. It would be impossible to make a refund.
The Exchange always decides where a man has a few acres of land, notwithstanding what the valuation may be, that he is not entitled to draw any benefit while unemployed, the excuse being that while unemployed he can work on the land. In that and similar cases will the contributions paid by these men be refunded, or otherwise not deduct contributions from them when they are employed?
No, the Deputy is not quite right in that. Each case is tried on its merits.