asked the Minister for Social Welfare the number of persons between the age of 65 years and 66 years who are currently in receipt of unemployment benefit, if he is aware of the resentment on the part of such persons retired from their employment at having to sign on each week in the local employment exchanges on the basis that they are allegedly available for work and in receipt of unemployment benefit until they officially qualify as old age pensioners, and if he will make alternative administrative arrangements for the payment of benefits to such persons.

The number of persons between the age of 65 and 66 years who are currently in receipt of unemployment benefit is about 1,100. Apart from the representations made by the Deputy, I am not aware of any complaints from persons over 65 regarding the present arrangements for payment of unemployment benefit in their case.

One of the statutory conditions for the receipt of unemployment benefit is that the claimant must be capable of and available for work. When signing the unemployed register each claimant is required to sign a declaration that he fulfils this and the other statutory conditions, and this requirement cannot be dispensed with. Payment is made in respect of the period covered by the declaration.

I am having the signing arrangements for claimants over 65 years of age examined within my Department. I would point out to the Deputy, however, that such persons already have more favourable signing arrangements in that they are not required to attend more frequently than once a week. It may be, too, that less frequent payment of benefit would not suit many such claimants and might create certain difficulties for them. However, it may be possible to do something on an optional basis and, as I have said, I am having the matter examined.

Will the Minister accept that 1,100 people throughout the country have a humiliating experience of signing on each week even though they are over 65, have no prospect of alternative employment and are obliged to present themselves in the official context of being available for work? They are not offered any employment and have no prospect of obtaining it. In those circumstances, those people, very often suffering the trauma of immediate retirement at 65 years, deserve a little bit more than to be dragged in each week for signing, which is almost irrelevant. I am glad to note that the Minister will change the arrangements. Would he not consider that there is urgency in that regard?

I accept what the Deputy said. I have asked that the matter be urgently examined within my Department.