HC Deb 15 February 1917 vol 90 cc797-800
66. Mr. HOGGE

asked the Minister of Pensions what arrangements he has made for controlling the Statutory Committee?

The MINISTER of PENSIONS (Mr. Barnes)

I fear that the details of the arrangements could not be set out within the limits of a Parliamentary reply, but ray hon. Friend may be assured that full effect will be given to the functions imposed upon me by Section 3 of the Ministry of Pensions Act, 1916. Meanwhile, a conference has been held and arrangements made for administrative purposes. I should be happy to supply my hon. Friend with any further details of these arrangements.

Mr. HOGGE

Does my right hon. Friend object to giving the House this information as to the carrying out of his intentions, or, if it is too long to give in reply to a question, will he circulate it?

Mr. BARNES

I have no objection to giving it to the House or anybody else. With regard to the second part of the question, that will be considered.

Mr. JONATHAN SAMUEL

Is the right hon. Gentleman still a member of the Statutory Committee?

Mr. BARNES

No, Sir.

Mr. HOGGE

If I put another question can we have the information printed with the Votes, or will the right hon. Gentleman give it now?

Mr. BARNES

I suggest that my hon. Friend should put down another question.

67. Sir GEORGE GREENWOOD

asked the Minister of Pensions whether his attention has been called to the case of Mrs. Ellen Salmon, a widow, residing at Peterborough, whose two elder sons have been killed in action in France, while the third son is a prisoner of war in Germany; whether her eldest son, Thomas Salmon, who was a Reservist in the King's Own Yorkshire Light Infantry, was called up for service with the Expeditionary Force at the outbreak of the War and was killed in action on 26th August, 1914; whether Mrs. Salmon, in spite of repeated applications by the local war pensions committee on her behalf, has never been able to obtain any separation allowance or pension in respect of his service and death; whether he can give any explanation of the delay of upwards of two and a half years which has occurred since Private Thomas Salmon's death without any settlement in the matter being arrived at; and whether he will at once take such steps as may be necessary in order that justice may be done without further delay?

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the MINISTRY of PENSIONS (Sir A. Griffith-Boscawen)

I am aware that the circumstances of this case are generally as set forth in the question, and I regret that since eligibility for pension was created in this and in a large number of similar cases by the Royal Warrant issued early in 1916, there has been delay in obtaining the information required to make an award. This is now available, and I have taken steps which will enable Mrs. Salmon, who has been regularly assisted by the local war pensions committee, at once to receive what is due to her. As my hon. Friend is doubtless aware, the Regulations now current are being revised, and the Minister of Pensions hopes shortly to present a new Royal Warrant to the House.

69. Mr. HOGGE

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he can state the number of petty officers and men, Royal Navy, and non-commissioned officers and men, Royal Marines, who have become entitled to pension since 2nd August, 1914, and have been retained in His Majesty's service; the number of these men who are not receiving their pensions; and the total annual value of the pensions due but not paid to the men?

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the ADMIRALTY (Dr. Macnamara)

As I have already explained in former replies on this subject, no men have become entitled to long service pensions since the 2nd August, 1914, since their services are retained under the Royal Proclamation of the 3rd August, 1914, made in pursuance of the Naval Enlistment Act, 1853. The number who, but for the War, would formally have been granted pension since the date in question cannot be stated precisely, but it is probably about 3,000. The total annual value cannot be calculated without a very great expenditure of labour, which in present circumstances I do not consider would be justified. I ought to remind my hon. Friend that the men retained receive, in addition to their pay, a special allowance of 2d. a day detained pay as from the date of completing time for pension, and they are allowed to count their additional service for increased pension, which, will be based on the total service on discharge, subject to a maximum limit in the case of Marines.

Mr. HOGGE

Suppose any of these men are killed as the result of a naval encounter, what happens to the pension to which they would otherwise be entitled?

Dr. MACNAMARA

They would not get it. The wife and children would get the usual pension.

Mr. HOGGE

Does my right hon. Friend mean that a sailor who has served twenty-two years, and who would otherwise be eligible for a pension, but is retained because of the War and loses his life, also loses all that he ought to have?

Dr. MACNAMARA

He would not have lived to take the pension, which would have been augmented had he lived. He has received the 2d. a day detained pay. His wife and children get a pension.

Mr. HOGGE

Is 2d. a day deferred pay equal to a pension for twenty-two years?

Dr. MACNAMARA

No, I did not say that.