To-day, I asked the Minister two separate questions to which he gave one answer. That is why I asked permission to raise both of them on the Adjournment. I asked the Minister in Question No. 47 if he would state in respect of the years 1957, 1958 and 1959 the number of claims for unemployment benefit (a) made and (b) allowed. Then, in Question No. 51, I asked the Minister if he would state in respect of the years 1957, 1958 and 1959 the number of claims for unemployment assistance (a) made and (b) allowed. I was very much surprised with the Minister's reply that the information was not compiled by his Department. I wonder why? It is not information that it would be difficult to get. It is vital and very useful information for members of this House.
Peculiarly enough, I asked the Minister the very same question in respect of sickness and disability benefits. I asked him how many applications had been made in the three years 1957, 1958 and 1959 and the number allowed. I suggest that if I can get a reply to that Question I should very easily have got a reply to Questions Nos. 47 and 51.
The Minister may say that a person could make several applications for unemployment benefit and unemployment assistance during the years and that it would be difficult to compile the different applications which even one person might make over the three years. The same could be said in respect of disability and sickness benefits where a person who was sick three or four times in the year or maybe more often has to apply for either sickness or disability benefit.
The amount of detailed information we have extracted from the Minister for Social Welfare on other occasions is extraordinary. Questions were put down, to which replies were given, in respect of working days lost through illness. Details were volunteered by the Parliamentary Secretary in respect of fraud. He made a statement some two years ago about fraudulent claims and the fraudulent affixation of stamps. He could give us very detailed information about fraudulent claims, about the number of prosecutions that have been made and about the number of convictions.
We also had over the years—I remember giving them in my time, as well, when I was Minister for Social Welfare—details of investigations carried out by Social Welfare officers. Some members of the Fianna Fáil Party during 1954 to 1957 seemed to suggest that people in receipt of or applying for these benefits were being investigated much more frequently than before; incidentally the figures proved the contrary. That information, which would not be as readily available as the information for which I asked today in Questions Nos. 47 and 51, could be got.
We get many detailed statistics from the Taoiseach's Department through the Parliamentary Secretary to the Taoiseach in an answer arising out of a very simple Question. Whether or not the Taoiseach's Department is more efficient than the Department of Social Welfare I do not know. I am sure there is not much difference in the personnel or the calibre of the civil servants but the Parliamentary Secretary to the Taoiseach knows that, day after day he gives information which I readily admit is pretty difficult to obtain but it is obtainable because this is a public Assembly and Deputies who ask these Questions want the information for their own benefit and for the benefit of the public.
I do not know, unless the Minister has a very convincing reply, what difficulty there might be in getting the information I require in regard to the number of applications made for unemployment benefit and unemployment assistance and the number of claims allowed It seems quite simple to get that information from the local offices if it is not already in the Department. The Parliamentary Secretary, replying for the Minister, said: "Statistics from which the information requested could be obtained are not compiled by my Department."
Maybe I am wronging the Parliamentary Secretary when I say he has refused to give this information. When he says "not compiled by my Department" is the accent on "my" or does he suggest it is compiled by another Department? Is it possible that the Questions addressed to the Minister for Social Welfare should have been addressed to the Taoiseach who is responsible for the compilation of statistics?
The ordinary practice is that when a Question is sent from the Dáil Office to the Minister to whom the Deputy addresses it, if it is not appropriate to that Department it is passed along to another Department. In view of the Parliamenary Secretary's reply, I must conclude that when he says "Statistics ...are not compiled by my Department" he means they are not compiled at all. In view of the Parliamentary Secretary's attitude and, I am sure, the attitude of the Minister, as well, I can only conclude that the Minister has something to hide. I should like to know what it is.
My information is that the Minister for Social Welfare is and has been for the past two or three years carrying on a purge against people who apply for unemployment benefit, unemployment assistance, disability benefit or sickness benefit. It seems that what is uppermost in the mind of the Minister for Social Welfare and of his Parliamentary Secretary is the desire to cut down the unemployment figures so as to show a reduction, I will not say at all costs but at certain costs.
The Government promised, and the Minister for Social Welfare as a member promised, they would declare war on unemployment. The contrary seems to be the case. Their behaviour seems to suggest that, rather than waging war on unemployment, they are waging war on certain of the unemployed. I do not know whether other Deputies have the same experience as I have but I understand that practically every person who now applies for unemployment assistance, unemployment benefit, sickness benefit or disability benefit is immediately suspect. I do not say there are not people who would make fraudulent claims. I do not say there are not people who would claim on the assumption that they are entitled to unemployment benefit who have not the necessary contributions. The trouble is that many people at present are being held up on their claim for unemployment benefit or unemployment assistance for as long as six weeks. The claim may eventually be allowed but in the meantime they have to exist on what they can get from the Home Assistance authorities. That is the reason why I want to get these figures which the Minister for Social Welfare refused to give me today.
If what I say is wrong then the Minister for Social Welfare should produce the figures to show that there is no purge or to show that all these people are not suspect and that the claims are accepted in good faith and are not suspect and that the direction of the Minister by officers of the Department of Social Welfare to such an extent that people are held up not alone for periods up to as much as six weeks but in some cases—I will not say a great many cases—for months before a decision is made on them.
I suspect that the officers of the Department, on the direction of the Minister, are working overtime in an effort to sort out these claims, to sort out the claims of those people who are deemed to be suspect until they prove their innocence through a court of appeal after waiting for a period of six weeks or in some cases for months.
When some of these people make their application for unemployment benefit or unemployment assistance and are refused by a deciding officer, or whoever it is, there are some of them—again I shall not exaggerate and say a lot of them—who take that decision from the deciding officer and do not appeal. They are turned down because they are immediately suspect, but it might be proved on appeal they are perfectly right, that unemployment benefit or unemployment assistance should be allowed to them or that they should be paid back money. But there are some people who are not aware—not through any fault of the officers in the local exchanges— people who, even though the matter is brought to their notice, do not realise they should appeal and who let their claim for unemployment benefit or unemployment assistance go by the board.
If I am wrong in saying there was a purge to cut down on the unemployed and show good figures, I will be the first to admit it. But from what I can see—and I do not speak with any detailed knowledge because I have no figures before me—and from the approaches I get from my constituents and other people I can only conclude this purge is in progress at present at the behest of the Minister for Social Welfare. Even if it takes two or three weeks or a month, I would appeal to the Parliamentary Secretary to make this information available to the House because I believe it is vital information and information which is the concern of many tens of thousands in this country.
