HC Deb 11 May 1911 vol 25 cc1364-6
Mr. LARDNER

asked whether the Local Government Board has issued to pension officers in Ireland a form on which the officers are required to state whether any member of the same household as an applicant is in receipt of, or has claimed, or is claiming, a pension, and what is the amount of the pension; whether any such form is issued in England, and, if so, on what date; whether there is any statutory authority for collecting such particulars; whether the fact of any other member of the household so claiming would disqualify the claimant; if not, what is the object of the circular; and whether this step has been taken with the knowledge or at the instance of the Treasury?

Mr. BIRRELL

The Local Government Board for Ireland have asked pension officers to supply this information, as the particulars required in the investigation of an appeal may and often have been already furnished by another member of the same household. The fact that another member of the household is in receipt of a pension does not disqualify a claimant. The information has been asked for under the authority of Article 19 of the Old Age Pensions Regulations. I understand it has not been found necessary to ask for similar information in England, but the number of appeals to be dealt with is considerably greater in Ireland.

Mr. MacVEAGH

What is the object of the circular, if the information supplied cannot be used for the purpose of disqualifying applicants?

Mr. BIRRELL

It is only information which is obtained over and over again.

Mr. MacVEAGH

Can the right hon. Gentleman give any intelligent reason why they should ask for information which is of no conceivable use to them?

Mr. BIRRELL

They certainly do not want any information which is not of use to them.

Mr. MacVEAGH

Why do they ask for it, then?

Mr. BIRRELL

Because they think it is of use to them.

Mr. KELLY

They have it already.

Mr. MacVEAGH

Why is this information not asked for in England?

Mr. BIRRELL

I cannot say.

Mr. HOHLER

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he was aware that Mrs. Elizabeth Croucher, a widow, aged 73, now residing at 19, May Road, Gillingham, in the county of Kent, had been refused an old age pension under the following circumstances: Mrs. Croucher has for upwards of fifty years resided in the parish of Gillingham; about two years ago her son, who is resident at Wellington, New Zealand, requested Mrs. Croucher to come out to Visit him; this she did, the son paying the passage money; whilst at Wellington, Mrs. Croucher was so unwell that she decided to return, and arrived in this country about February last; whether Mrs. Croucher is penniless, in bed, and in receipt of parish relief; whether Mrs. Croucher is in fact disqualified to receive an old age pension; and, if so, would he consider whether the Act or the regulations made thereunder can be amended so as to include her case?

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE

I am enquiring into the fact s of this case, and will communicate the result to the hon. Member in due course.

Mr. CATHCART WASON

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether, in view of the fact that there are a number of similar cases of hardship entailed on people who have temporarily lost domicile, and that this is a non-controversial matter, he will introduce an amending Bill to enable pensions to be paid in such cases?

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE

I do not generally find that a Bill introduced by the Chancellor of the Exchequer is non-controversial. I will consider the point. There is no doubt that there are a few cases of hardship, but I cannot promise to propose legislation on the subject.