§ Mr. PATRICK O'BRIEN (for Mr. Boland)asked the Chief Secretary whether he is aware that the old age pension committee of Caherciveen passed, on 5th January, the claim of Timothy Sullivan, East End, Caherciveen, for an old age pension; and whether, in view of the fact that the claim was disallowed on a previous occasion because of an error in the record of visits paid to the United 374 States by the claimant, the new claim will now be allowed?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThe Local Government Board see no reason for believing that there was any error made with regard to the visits that the claimant paid to the United States. His new claim is at present before the Board on appeal, and further inquiries will be made into the matter.
§ Mr. LONSDALEasked if the Local Government Board have authorised boards of guardians to require old age pensioners under treatment in workhouse infirmaries to refund the cost of their maintenance during the time they are under treatment?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThe answer is in the negative. When boards of guardians make such a proposal it is the practice of the Local Government Board to refer them to the terms of Section 6 of the Old Age Pensions Act under which an assignment of a pension is declared to be void.
§ Mr. LAURENCE HARDYasked the Secretary to the Treasury whether he can furnish full details with regard to the saving of one million and a-half to the rates, which is estimated to have been received through the termination of the pauper disqualification in connection with old age pensions; whether he can state the numbers of outdoor and indoor paupers which were estimated to be likely to receive old age pensions and the numbers of each class who actually claimed them; and whether he can give the average at which relief was estimated, both for outdoor and indoor paupers?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEI beg to refer the hon. Member to the Written Answer which I gave to the hon. Member for North Salford on Monday last. The estimate made last year of the number of persons debarred from receiving pensions by pauper disqualification who would during the current quarter obtain pensions was about 230,000. The number who obtained pensions as from 6th January, 1911, was 163,165 only.
§ Mr. LAURENCE HARDYCould the right hon. Gentleman give me the difference between the estimated number of indoor paupers likely to receive old age pensions and those who have claimed?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSENo, I do not think I could do that. The hon. Member will find the numbers set out in the answers to which I have referred him.
§ Mr. HARRY LAWSONWould the right hon. Gentleman be willing to give the same information with regard to the county of London?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEI am not quite sure I can get the figures; but I do not see any difficulty in doing it.
Mr. CATHCART WASONasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if his attention has been directed to the hardship suffered by persons who may have been absent from the United Kingdom for a certain time and are unable to obtain their pension, although they may have been only a few years absent abroad, until they have resided twenty years after their return in the United Kingdom; and whether he will consider the desirability of introducing an Amendment reducing the period in the event of the Government introducing a Bill to amend the Old Age Pensions Act?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEA great many questions on this and similar points have been addressed to the Chancellor of the Exchequer and myself, more particularly on the 8th, 9th, 14th, and 20th of February, and I have nothing to add to the answers then given?
Mr. WILLIAM REDMONDMay I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether, in view of the number of cases there are of this kind, he will consider the advisability of taking powers in an Amending Act to make an exception in cases of admitted hardship, where a man may have been only a year or two away, and where, failing to receive a pension, a man would have to go upon the rates?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEMy attention has been drawn constantly from all parts of the House to cases of such hardship. I have dealt with them in the several answers to which I referred.
§ Mr. CHIOZZA MONEYWould not the remedy for these admitted hardships be to pass an Amending Act which would not be opposed on any side of the House, but which could not be introduced by a private Member because it is a money Bill?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEI am quite aware of the last point, but I am not quite so sure that the passage of the Bill would be so facilitated as my hon. Friend suggests. [HON. MEMBERS: "Try it."] If there is a general concensus of opinion upon the point, that particular principle could be dealt with in an Amending Act.
§ Mr. CHIOZZA MONEYIs my right hon. Friend aware that hon. Members opposite have tried to introduce such a Bill?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSENo.
Mr. WILLIAM REDMONDMay I ask the Prime Minister in view of the general agreement on this matter whether he could not see his way to give time for an amending Bill on the understanding that it would meet with general agreement?
§ The PRIME MINISTERThe point is new to me, but I will consider it.