§ Mr. RHYS DAVIES
asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that extended benefit has been refused to Miss Hilda Brookfield, 16, Longfield Street, New Springs, Wigan, 22 years of age, without parents, with an unmarried brother and sister working short time and another sister totally blind, in spite of the recommendation of the local rota committee that such benefit should be paid; and whether he will take steps to 1672W amend Memorandum L.E.C. 82/17, paragraphs 4, 5 and 6, so that payment of extended benefit may be made in cases of this kind?
§ Mr. BETTERTON
This case was brought to the notice of my right hon. Friend by the hon. Member a short time ago and fully investigated. Having regard to the income of the household my right hon. Friend felt bound to maintain the disallowance of extended benefit and the hon. Member was so informed on 5th July.
§ Sir W. EDGE
asked the Minister of Labour if his attention has been called to the position of colliery examiners and deputies with regard to unemployment insurance; and, if so, whether he proposes to deal with their case in the forthcoming Bill?
§ Mr. BETTERTON
I assume that the hon. Member is referring to the disallowance of claims to unemployment benefit made by colliery examiners and deputies during last year's coal dispute. The Report of Lord Blanesburgh's Committee makes certain recommendations for the amendment of the law in this connection and the recommendations are receiving careful consideration. I am unable, however, to anticipate the provisions of the Unemployment Insurance Bill.
§ Mr. NAYLOR
asked the Minister of Labour whether he will inquire into the circumstances in which W. J. Banner, aged 18½; years, of 90, Guinness's Buildings, Brandon Street, Walworth, S.E., an employée at Daly's Theatre for 2½; years during which period full contributions were paid, was refused standard benefit by the committee of the Borough Employment Exchange on the ground that the committee considered that he had failed to prove that he was making every reasonable effort to obtain employment suited to his capacities, notwithstanding the fact that he had been out of work only a few days when his application was considered by the committee?
§ Mr. BETTERTON
There was some difficulty in ascertaining whether standard benefit was available owing to the unemployment book, which had recently been exchanged, being missing, and in order to avoid hardship, the local em 1673W ployment committee were asked, while inquiries were proceeding, to consider whether extended benefit should be paid. The evidence before the Committee was, that between 9th and 19th July, 1927, the applicant had not made any calls in search of employment and they considered that the statutory condition for extended benefit requiring the applicant to prove that he was making every reasonable effort to obtain employment was not fulfilled, and were unable to recommend that such benefit should be granted; I can see no ground for differing from the conclusion which the committee reached. The standard benefit position has since been cleared up and payment has been made of the arrears of standard benefit which were due.