HC Deb 14 September 1914 vol 66 cc834-5

Notwithstanding anything in any Act, Order, or Royal Warrant to the contrary, pensions payable in respect of military service shall be issued in advance at such intervals (not exceeding three months) as the Army Council may from time to time by order direct:

Provided that this Section shall not apply in the case of pensions granted before the passing of this Act.

Lord HUGH CECIL

Will the right hon. Gentleman explain the force of the proviso?

Mr. TENNANT

I beg to move, as an Amendment to the proviso, to add the words,

"and that an Order of the Army Council under this Section may in any case provide, where a soldier who has enlisted before the passing of this Act dies whilst in receipt of a pension, that a sum not exceeding the amount of his pension for three months may be paid to his personal representative"

I propose to add these words in order that the recipients may remain entitled to advances against the full quarter's pension as they are entitled now. The original words did not give that power to the State. For instance, if a man had been in receipt of his quarter's pension and died within four or five days, under the existing law his relatives would receive the full quarter's pension. But, under the proposal to pay weekly, the relatives would receive only the week's pay instead of the full quarter. Under the words I propose to insert, the relatives will get the full quarter's pay.

Lord HUGH CECIL

The Amendment seems to be a very decent one, but I do not understand the force of the original proviso. Why should there be any distinction between pensions granted before the passing of this Act and pensions granted after? I agree that the Amendment is an improvement, but the original provision seems strange.

Mr. TENNANT'S

reply was inaudible in the Reporters' Gallery.

Lord HUGH CECIL

Would this proviso affect the person who may be suffering from disablement during the first six weeks of the War?

Mr. TENNANT

was understood to reply in the negative.

Lord HUGH CECIL

What I was apprehensive of was that there would be a distinction made between people wounded or disabled early in the War and those wounded or disabled later in the War.

Mr. TENNANT

I think the Noble Lord is in error there. I think the intention of the Bill is pretty clear; all persons who receive pensions owing to the present War will be treated alike, while persons who are in receipt of pensions prior to the outbreak of this War will be treated differently.

Mr. RAWLINSON

May I ask, first, if those who become entitled to pensions in connection with the present War become entitled to them directly they are incapacitated? The second point I would like to put is this: Are the dependants of soldiers entitled to pensions for two or three months after death, or do the pensions terminate at death?

Mr. TENNANT

The answer to the first point raised by the hon. and learned Gentleman is that no pensions have yet been created owing to the existence of this War, and none have been granted. As to the second point, let me give an illustration: I have heard of a case of a man who died, and a pension was claimed by the relatives on the ground that he had died one minute after twelve o'clock on a particular day. Inquiry found that to be so, and a full quarter's pension was granted to the relative. That has always been the case. It was thought very undesirable that what the relatives of pensioners considered themselves entitled to should be diminished by any action that we have taken here.

Question, "That those words be there inserted," put, and agreed to.

Question, "That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill," put, and agreed to.

Bill reported; as amended considered; read the third time, and passed.

The remaining Government Orders were read, and postponed.