asked the Minister for Social Welfare the reason social welfare benefit was considerably reduced in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Carlow.
Written Answers. - Social Welfare Benefits.
610.
The person concerned exhausted his entitlement to unemployment benefit on 2 May 1983 when he had received benefit for 390 days. He had been in receipt of flat-rate unemployment benefit £75,00 weekly and pay-related benefit £18.38 weekly.
He claimed unemployment assistance from 3 May 1983. He was, however, assessed with means of £48.75 weekly derived from his Army pension. Accordingly, the weekly rate of unemployment assistance payable to him is £15.00 being the maximum rate payable to him as a married man with three qualified children £63.75 less £48.75.
He appealed against the amount of means assessed against him and his case was referred to an appeals officer for determination. The appeals officer upheld the assessment of his means at £48.75 weekly.
615.
asked the Minister for Social Welfare the reason social welfare benefit has been disallowed in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Carlow; the number of contributions attributed to him in the last qualifying year for social welfare benefit; the reason there is no computer record on his registered claim even though the decision to allow his claim has been refused on appeal; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
The person concerned satisfied the contribution conditions for entitlement to unemployment benefit as he has a total of 51 contributions, representing 28 Class A paid contributions and 23 credited contributions during the relevant contribution period 6 April 1981 to 5 April 1982.
However, an applicant for unemployment benefit must also be genuinely seeking work to satisfy the condition of being available for work. During the course of inquiries the person concerned stated that he was not looking for work but was awaiting seasonal work only when it became available. His claim was accordingly disallowed on the grounds that he was not available for work.
He appealed against the disallowance but following an oral hearing of his case on 17 May 1983 at which he attended an appeals officer upheld the disallowance.
He continued to sign as unemployed and his case was reviewed from 18 May 1983. Following the completion of further inquiries his claim was again disallowed on the grounds that the was not available for work. He has not appealed against the decision to date.