1. No, not specifically arising out of the consideration of the amount of money in the unemployment insurance fund; however, as a result of reports from the unemployment insurance commission and representations from labour union federations, the committee recommended to the government at its meetings in July 1951 and April 1952 certain changes in the act and concurred in changes recommended by the unemployment insurance commission in certain regulations.
2. (a) The reduction of the waiting period by three days.
(b) Amendment of section 35 (1) (b) to give the commission power by regulation to defer the waiting period when a benefit year terminates during a period when the claimant is unemployed.
(c) The increase in the scale of benefit rates raising the maximum rate for a beneficiary with a dependent from $21 to $24, with comparable increases in other rates, with no increase in contribution rates.
(d) The period during which supplementary benefit may be paid to be extended from March 31 to April 15.
3. The unemployment insurance commission recommended these changes to the government and they were put into effect by act of parliament assented to on July 4, 1952. In addition, the commission by regulation provided for the postponement of the waiting period where a benefit year commences within fourteen days of the termination of the previous benefit year and where the claimant was employed for less than six days during that two-week period; and another regulation provided for the payment of benefit during a holiday shut-down of more than one week where no pay was received from the employer.
4. Answered by No. 3.
5. No, the unemployment insurance commission and the advisory committee have found the problem most difficult of solution but are now giving it further consideration.
6. 7 and 8. Answered by No. 5.