§ 44. Mr. BYRNEasked the Pensions Minister whether any scheme for increased pensions to dependants of soldiers and sailors has yet been agreed to; if so, when will it be operative?
§ The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the MINISTRY of PENSIONS (Colonel Sir Arthur Griffith-Boscawen)I can add nothing to my previous replies on this subject.
§ 55. Mr. JOWETTasked the Pensions Minister respecting the application for a grant from the Military Service (Civil Liabilities) Committee made by Lance-Corporal—No. 28306, 6th Yorkshire Regiment, who was an estate joiner prior to enlistment, in receipt of 23s. per week and house rent free, with liberty to earn extra money by private work, and had other pecuniary advantages allowed to him, and who, under these conditions, took out insurance policies in 1912 which committed him to the payment of premiums amounting to £3 18s. 8d. a year, which application has been refused; whether he is aware that the insurance policies referred to are on the point of being lapsed on account of the impossibility of the soldier's wife paying the 476 premiums out of her total income of 28s. per week, out of which she has also to pay rent and maintain herself and three children, aged four, seven, and eight, respectively; and if he, will make urgent inquiries into this, case with the object of affording to this soldier the protection which was promised when the Military Service (Civil Liabilities) Committee was instituted?
§ The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. Stephen Walsh)The case cannot be identified from the particulars supplied, but if the hon. Member will send my right hon. Friend the President of the Local Government Board the name and address of the man he refers to he will have inquiry made.
§ 56. Mr. JOWETTasked the Pensions Minister if the concession recently made to meet the case of parents of soldiers killed in action who cannot prove pre-war dependence because their sons enlisted during apprenticeship, and whilst their sons were, in, fact, incurring monetary obligations towards their parents, which, having regard to the slender resources of their parents, the sons would have repaid on the completion of their apprenticeships, goes no further than that it merely empowers the grant of a pension if the parents are in pecuniary need, whereas, before the concession was made, pensions in the circumstances mentioned were granted in cases of hardship, which change in effect is little more than a change of words; and, if the concession goes no further than this, whether he will take steps at an early date to deal effectively with this long-standing grievance?
§ Sir A. GRIFFITH-BOSCAWENI am not sure that I follow this question. The concession made as regards pensions to-parents who had not been actually dependent on their sons consisted in extending to other parents the special provision made in the Royal Warrant of last March for the parents of apprentices. If the hon. Member is thinking not of pensions but of separation allowances, I may remind him of my reply to the question he put to me on 13th February, when I explained that the amended Regulation removes the condition of "hardship" and permits of an allowance being given, equivalent to the support the soldier might reasonably be expected to give if he were in civil life, when such allowance 477 is necessary for the due upkeep of the home. This is, I think, something more than a mere change of words.
§ Mr. BUTCHERIs me new Regulation accessible? Has it been published?
§ Sir A. GRIFFITH-BOSCAWENIt has been published, I should think, within the last month.
§ 57. Colonel ASHLEYasked the Pensions Minister whether he is aware that John Thomas Blackman, 6, Connaught Villas, Arthur Road, Windsor, a discharged soldier, was supplied with a glass eye by the country at a total cost of 10s. 6d.; and that, in order to obtain the glass eye, he was compelled to travel to Reading, losing thirteen and a-half hours' work, at 10|d. per hour; and whether in such cases he will take steps to see that the discharged man who has to lose work and travel some distance in order to have artificial eyes or limbs provided has his out-of-pocket expenses paid?
§ Sir A. GRIFFITH-BOSCAWENAny discharged disabled man is entitled under the Instructions of the Ministry to obtain from his local War Pensions Committee payment of the travelling and out-of-pocket expenses (including within certain limits, loss of wages) incurred by him in connection with his treatment. I have communicated with the local committee in regard to the particular case referred to.