§ 14. Mr. SNOWDENasked the Secretary to the Admiralty if he can state why no reply has been sent to two letters sent to the Accountant-General for the Navy, 4a, Newgate Street, E.C., by the mother of Percy Mitchell, A.B., No. 14 Mess, His Majesty's ship "Erin," with regard to the mother's allowance due to her on account of her son having made the extra grant; and will attention be immediately given to the matter?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAThe allowance referred to is the allotment concession, a benefit which the seaman can retain for himself or can allow to his dependants. Mitchell wished his mother to receive the extra grant, and authority for payment has now been issued. As regards the omission to reply to two letters on this subject, which I regret, I must explain that over 200,000 individual cases were affected by the introduction of this particular concession, and in some cases considerable delay in authorising the necessary increase of allowances and in dealing with the resultant correspondence has been unavoidable. It was, in fact, specially pointed out in the Order to the Fleet on this subject that, in view of the work involved, delay was unfortunately to be anticipated.
§ 61. Mr. JOWETTasked the Pensions Minister, concerning Private J. H. M'Laren, late No. 11080, 11th Service Battalion, Duke of Wellington's Regiment, who was shot through the shoulder and, after being eight and nine months in hospital, was discharged from the Army on 29th April, 1916, and is now in receipt of 12s. a week pension altogether for him self, wife, and his three children, whether he is aware that during the first eight months after his discharge, although he was then and has ever since been totally unfit for any work that has been available to him, M'Laren's pension was 24s. 9d. a week altogether for himself, wife, and his three children, and that when this amount was afterwards reduced to 19s. 6d. for himself, wife, and three children, M'Laren was driven by the insufficiency of his pension to accept the only work he could get, and, in consequence, he fell from a ladder whilst cleaning windows in the course of his employment when he had only effective use of one arm; if he is aware that, as the result of this accident, M'Laren 2182 is permanently crippled and cannot move without the aid of two crutches; and whether, having regard to all the facts of the case, he will reconsider his decision, which is, in effect, a denial that M'Laren's pension was insufficient to represent the extent of disability prior to the accident?
§ The MINISTER of PENSIONS (Mr. Hodge)I regret that I have not yet completed my inquiries into this matter. Perhaps the hon. Member will be good enough to put his question down again in a few days' time.
§ 39 and 40. Captain BARNETTasked the Financial Secretary to the War Office (1) if he is now in a position to state whether the consolidated family allowance payable in the case of married soldiers living at home is in effect separation allowance plus 7s. per week for the keep of the soldier; if so, what steps are being taken to increase the allowance or, alternatively, to issue rations instead of the said 7s.;(2) whether, as from 1st May, the ration allowance payable to single men and to married men separated from their wives has been increased by 4d. per diem; and, if so, why no corresponding increase has been, granted to married soldiers living at home?
§ The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the WAR OFFICE (Mr. Forster)The increase of family allowance to cover the increased cost of the ration is under consideration, and I hope very shortly to be in a position to announce a decision.
§ 45. Mr. HOGGEasked the Prime Minister what decision has been reached about the payment of separation allowances on a better basis to the dependants of apprentices who have not yet since the outbreak of war been able to establish a claim that satisfies the practice of local war pension committees?
§ Mr. FORSTERMy right hon. Friend has asked me to answer this question. I have nothing to add to the answer which I gave on Wednesday last to the hon. Member for West Fife.
§ Mr. HOGGEMay I ask the Leader of the House, to whom this question was put, and who asked that it should be postponed, whether he is aware that when the Pension Estimate was discusser, the Pensions Minister and the whole House expressed a desire that this reform should be granted, and whether the Government 2183 intend to do anything in regard to this matter? Will the right hon. Gentleman answer?
§ The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (Mr. Bonar Law)I cannot answer, as I have not looked into it.
§ Mr. HOGGEIs the right hon. Gentleman aware I put it last week? He asked me to postpone it in order that he could look into it.
§ Mr. BONAR LAWThe hon. Gentleman is mistaken. I asked him to postpone it in order that it might be looked into. I did not undertake to look into it, but I will do so.
§ 46. Mr. HOGGEasked the Prime Minister what further evidence he yet requires to be satisfied that the separation allowances paid to wives and dependants of serving men is inadequate to their needs; whether his objection to raising the same is a Treasury objection; and whether he is prepared to provide an opportunity on the Vote of Credit for discussing the same?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWI think that it would be more convenient to deal in Debate with the points raised in the question, and, if hon. Members desire, the subject can be discussed in connection with the Vote of Credit next week.
§ Mr. HOGGEWill the right hon. Gentleman give us an opportunity of debating this particular subject?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWIt does not depend on me; it depends on the House of Commons. I shall be glad to.