HC Deb 17 February 1916 vol 80 cc215-7
8. Mr. MACMASTER

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what progress has been made with the scheme suggested for aiding our wounded and disabled soldiers and sailors during and after the War; and what is the result of the promised co-operation with the Dominions in this connection?

The PRESIDENT of the LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. Walter Long)

The latest available information as to the measures for dealing with disabled soldiers and sailors will be found in Part I. of the Final Report of the Departmental Committee, appointed by the President of the Board of Agriculture, Cd. 8162. I have no further information to give to the House, but the whole subject is receiving the attention of the Departments of the Government concerned in it.

Mr. MACMASTER

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the report to which he refers contains any reference to co-operation with the Colonies in this connection?

Mr. LONG

No, none at all. It deals only with a branch of the subject, but that particular part of the subject, co-operation with the Colonies, is engaging the attention of my right hon. Friend the Colonial Secretary and myself.

81. Mr. ANDERSON

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War how many men have been discharged on medical grounds without receiving any pension; how many soldiers have died from disease under circumstances which debarred their widows or other dependants from drawing pensions; and whether, in view of the feeling that has been aroused, the War Office propose to modify existing rules?

85. Mr. BARNES

asked the Under-Secretary for War the number of men who have been discharged from the Army since the beginning of the War on the ground of physical incapacity, but without pension or allowance, on the ground of their ailments not being caused by war service; is he aware that many of these men are in distress through lack of means; and if the Government have any intention of doing anything for them, in view of the effect upon appeals to married men to join the Army of the knowledge which is now becoming general of the neglect of the men in question?

Mr TENNANT

Out of 35,500 men discharged from the Army for disability up to the end of 1915, about 12,000 have received no pension. About 400 widows of soldiers have been found ineligible for pensions from Army funds. The 12,000 consists chiefly of men who upon their unit being ordered abroad were not found equal to the strain of active service in the field. They also include men whose disability was due to misconduct.

Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKE

Can the right hon. Gentleman inform us how it happens that some Members of this House and of the other House are able to claim pensions while other Members are not?

Mr. TENNANT

Of course it does not depend on the person applying for the pension, but on the person for whom the pension is applied.

Mr. ANDERSON

Does the right hon. Gentleman think it is a good arrangement whereby one Member who applies for a pension is refused, while if somebody a little more influential applies for it for the same man it is granted? Is that not a very unsatisfactory arrangement?

Mr. TENNANT

Yes, certainly.

Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKE

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that that has happened?

Mr. TENNANT

Not at all.

Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKE

May I briny a case of the kind to the right hon. Gentleman's attention?

Mr. TENNANT

That will be adding to the privileges my hon. Friend conjects.

95. The following question stood in the name of Sir EDWIN CORNWALL: To ask the Under-Secretary of State for War whether the Government have decided not to give pensions to members of the fighting forces permanently invalided through consumption, frostbite, gassing, and all such similar causes of permanent disability; and will he make a full statement as to the policy of the War Office in this matter?

Sir E. CORNWALL

This subject was dealt with in Debate yesterday. I do not know whether the right hon. Gentleman has anything more to add.

Mr. TENNANT

Under the Royal Warrant pensions are given to non-commissioned officers and men discharged as unfit for further service on account of wounds or injuries or sunstroke received in action or in the performance of military duty, or on account of blindness caused by military service, or of disease due directly and wholly to war service. I am at a loss to understand what can have given rise to such an impression as that contained in the question. My hon. Friend the Financial Secretary made a statement last night on this question.

Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKE

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the provision made is considered inadeqate?