§ 45. Mr. JOYNSON-HICKS
asked the Prime Minister (1) whether, as the recently-appointed Committee on Pensions does not deal with the present position of officers' wives, he will consider whether something in the nature of separation or lodging allowances can be allowed for those wives whose husbands are now at the front; and (2) whether the wives of such officers as are entitled to lodgings or lodging allowance are turned out within ninety days of their husbands leaving for the front; and whether he will consider the possibility, pending the consideration of the whole question, of modifying this order or providing a sufficient lodging allowance?
§ The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the WAR OFFICE (Mr. Baker)
This subject has been under consideration, and I hope that an announcement will be made very soon.
§ 55. Mr. COWAN
asked the Under-Secretary of State for War what provision it is intended to make by way of pension or otherwise to soldiers who have suffered injuries, such as the loss of an eye, which although incapacitating them for further military service do not altogether prevent their following civil employment?
§ Mr. H. BAKER
The present regulations make provision for grants of pension or gratuity for injuries which result in a loss of earning capacity in civil life. As the hon. Member is aware, the whole subject is under review by the recently appointed Committee.
§ 63. Mr. BUTCHER
asked whether the usual separation allowance is payable to the wife of a soldier serving with the Colours when such wife has obtained, before her husband enlisted, a separation order and a magistrate's order on her husband to pay her 10s. or some other sum a week for the maintenance of herself and children; if such separation allowance is payable, whether the wife is entitled to enforce such magistrate's order, wholly or in part, in the case where the soldier has no means other than his pay; and, if such separation allowance is not payable, what steps the wife should take to enforce such magistrate's order, first when the soldier is serving or is under orders to serve beyond the seas, and, secondly, when the soldier is not serving or under orders to serve beyond the seas?
§ Mr. BUTCHER
Can the hon. Gentleman say whether where the wife has got a separation order on the husband to pay her 10s. per week, the Government's separation allowance will also be paid her?
§ 70. Mr. JOYNSON-HICKS
asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether in considering the question of separation allowances, he will put before the Committee the case of the lieutenant-quartermaster, the majority of whom have risen from the ranks, and whose wives and children suffer hardships when the husband is at the front?
§ 79. Mr. GWYNNE
asked the Under-Secretary of State for War, whether the new regulations by which a soldier can obtain 9s. a week for his mother, if dependent on him, by agreeing to a deduction of 6d. a day from his pay, apply in the case of two sons—that is, can 18s. a week be obtained by the mother if both sons agree to a deduction of 6d. a day?
§ 80. Mr. GWYNNE
asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if his attention has been called to cases in which men in the Territorial Force who were engaged to be married before the War broke out, and have since been married, are unable to obtain separation allowances for their wives because they were not married before 14th August; and whether he will have this hardship remedied, seeing that new recruits now joining the forces can obtain separation allowances for their wives irrespective of the date of their marriage?
§ 85. Mr. MOUNT
asked whether, when the father of a soldier has died since the commencement of the War and since the son's enlistment, and the soldier signifies his intention of allotting a sum for the maintenance of his widowed mother, this allotment will have the same allowances added to it as would be the case had the allotments been made before the War and had the mother been dependent on her son?
§ Mr. H. BAKER
This case is outside the existing provision for dependants; but I will see that it receives consideration.
§ 89. Mr. RUPERT GWYNNE
asked the financial Secretary to the War Office whether quartermasters in the Territorial Force, if married, get lodging allowances for their families on mobilisation in the same way that quartermasters in the Regular Army get it; and, if such is the case, will he inquire why these allowances have been refused by head-quarters, Eastern Command?
§ Mr. RUPERT GWYNNE
Will the hon. Gentleman say how it is that the Territorials on mobilisation do not get the same privileges as the men in the Regular Army?
90. Mr. SHIRLEY BENN
asked if a man of thirty-four years of age, in excellent health, who retired from the Army after twelve years' service as a private, possessing two medals and seven bars, and volunteered for service on the 14th November in answer to the call for recruits, was refused a separation allowance for his wife on the ground that his marriage had taken place after the 13th August; and whether some modification could be made in the regulation in legitimate cases?
§ 91. Mr. MOUNT
asked the President of the Local Government Board whether any regulations have yet been issued for the guidance of local old age pensions committees in arriving at the recommendations to be made to the War Office and the Admiralty for the purpose of assessing the additional allowances to be given to widows of soldiers and sailors in cases of necessity under paragraphs A, 7, and 9 of Command Paper 7662?
§ The PRESIDENT of the LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. Herbert Samuel)
The answer is in the negative. The whole subject is now before the recently appointed Select Committee.