§ 19. Mr. HORE-BELISHAasked the Secretary of State for War how many men were invalided from the service in 1926; how many of these were denied pensions on the ground of non-attributability; how many appealed to the War Office against the original decision; and in how many cases the decision was modified?
§ The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the WAR OFFICE (Captain Douglas King)The exact number of men invalided from the Army during 1926 is not available, but the total number of disability cases (including those of men already discharged) dealt with by the Chelsea Commissioners during that year was 2,546. In 2,100 cases the disability was found to be not attributable to military service, but 639 of the men concerned were eligible for non-attributable awards of gratuity or temporary pension. As I informed the hon. Member in July last, it is not possible to distinguish between appeals made by the men themselves and eases referred to the War Office by the Chelsea Commissioners for further consideration. The approximate number of cases referred under both heads was 137, and the decision was modified in 59.
§ Mr. HORE-BELISHADoes the hon. and gallant Member suggest that the figures with regard to invaliding from the Army are not kept at the War Office? Can they not be made available? Is the Department considering the necessity for establishing a proper legal appeal tribunal?
§ Captain KINGIn the answer, I give the cases dealt with by Chelsea Hospital. There are other cases in the commands which do not necessarily come before the Chelsea Commission.
Dr. VERNON DAVIESDoes the hon. and gallant Member think that the present method of assessment could be improved upon?
§ Captain KINGI think that the present method of assessment is proving quite satisfactory.
§ Mr. HORE-BELISHAIs the Department considering the necessity of establishing an appeal tribunal? And has the hon. and gallant Member's attention been called to the remarks of the First Lord of the Admiralty last night?
§ Captain KINGMy attention has not been called to those remarks. The question of an appeal tribunal has been considered on many occasions, but it is not considered necessary to set one up.