asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce whether his attention has been drawn to announcements in the newspapers during the adjournment, with reference to reciprocal arrangements between the Governments of Northern Ireland, Great Britain and the Saorstát, regarding unemployment insurance; whether he is aware that attempts were made to place upon the Saorstát Government the entire blame for the failure to arrive at an agreement that would give benefit to unemployed Irishmen and women on both sides of the Border; and whether he is aware that failure to arrive at agreement has resulted in loss to many deserving persons who receive no benefits from their stamped cards.
CEISTEANNA—QUESTIONS. ORAL ANSWERS. - RECIPROCAL ARRANGEMENTS REGARDING UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE.
I have not seen any announcement in the Press during the adjournment attributing to the Government of the Saorstát the failure to arrive at reciprocal agreements with the other Governments concerned. Any such announcement would be erroneous. The truth is stated in the Resolution adopted by the 34th Annual Congress of the Irish Labour Party and Trade Union Congress in Belfast on the 7th of August, 1928, to the effect that the Congress condemned the rejection by the Minister of Labour for Northern Ireland of all proposals by the Minister for Industry and Commerce of the Irish Free State for reciprocal arrangements, and the failure of the Minister of Labour for Northern Ireland to put forward any alternative proposals. It was because I am aware of the hardship referred to in the last part of the question that I made the proposals which were rejected.
Would the Minister say if any further negotiations have taken place between his Department, the Six-County Government and the British Government in regard to this question of reciprocal arrangement?
No.
Why not?
Because there is no reason to hope that they would be successful.
Is the Minister aware that as a result of this the workers and the employers on both sides of the Border are being systematically robbed, in view of the fact that the workers and employers are paying their contributions and that the workers are getting no benefit? The only people who are benefiting are the two Governments.
Not the two Governments—the two funds. That statement is pretty accurate, except for the comment of "robbery."
Does the Minister not think that, in view of what has taken place and the fact that there are no reciprocal arrangements, negotiations should be re-opened?
I do not see any good in re-opening them when there is not the slightest prospect of success.
Does the Minister mean that it is legalised robbery?
That does not add to it.