§ 8. Mr. BUCHANANasked the Minister of Pensions if he is aware that Mrs. 2072 Devlin, 55, Sandyfaulds Street, Glasgow, had a pension granted to her for the death of her son on active service in 1917 of 15s. 6d. a week, based on the weekly income earned by the late soldier of 26s. a week; that over six years afterwards the pension was reduced from 15s. 6d. to 4s. 10d. a week, as it was thought that the wage was only 16s. 6d.; that the parents on oath deny the last-named estimate; that no proof has so far been given of the lesser wage; that the reason now given has been altered to one of a mistake in calculating the value of the wage; and if he will take steps to have the original pension restored?
§ Major TRYONThe pension originally granted in this case was based upon an unverified statement by the soldier that his weekly earnings were 25s. When the case was reviewed, a certificate, under statutory authority, was obtained from the employers showing that the man's earnings averaged 16s. 7d. a week. For the purpose of assessing pre-War dependence, regard had necessarily to be paid to the average value of the benefit regularly received by the parent from the son's payments over a reasonably long period. There has been no alteration in the grounds upon which the Ministry had to act when reviewing the pension, which has had throughout to be based upon the wages earned by the son and the value of support received by the parent. On the information before me, I should have no justification for increasing the present rate of pre-War dependence pension.
§ Mr. BUCHANANEven assuming that the wage of 26s. a week was incorrect, what justification is there for decreasing this pension from 15s. 6d. to 4s. 10d. a week?
§ Major TRYONOf course, if a question of need arises, the case can be reconsidered: but, on the point raised by the hon. Member, it is not possible to contend that the late soldier, out of an average earnings of 16s. 7d., would have contributed 15s. 6d. in support of his parents.
§ Mr. BUCHANANIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that all that the officials of the Ministry have done is to consult the employers six years after the pension was originally fixed, that the parents still think they should receive 2073 the original sum, and that the Ministry have no right to cast aspersions on their estimate of the late soldier's earnings?
§ Major TRYONInquiries were fully made into this matter, and it was ascertained that the average earnings were 16s. 7d. a week, and the calculation is based on that.
§ Mr. J. H. THOMASWhat justification or what evidence is there for assuming that the young man earning that amount did not contribute it to his parents?
§ Major TRYONHere is a man whose wages are estimated at 16s. 7d.—
§ Mr. BUCHANANNo.
§ Major TRYON—and it is obvious that such a man could not contribute 15s. 6d. beyond his own keep for the upkeep of his parents. As a matter of fact, there is no doubt that we are in general in these cases—and rightly so—allowing more than the sons would have been able to contribute.
§ Mr. MACQUISTENIf this boy had lived for a few more years, would he not have been earning a much bigger wage?
§ Major TRYONIt is the case that there are five surviving brothers, and their contributions to the support of their parents are almost negligible.
§ Mr. BUCHANANThe right hon. Gentleman is smart, but is something not due in fairness to this dead soldier, he having stated that his wage was 25s. 7d. a week, and his mother being prepared to state, on oath, that she has never been consulted in the matter? Is it not the case that all that has been done is, six years afterwards, to consult the books of this firm, though it might be any Devlin who earned this sum and not this boy at all?
§ Major TRYONIf the hon. Member can produce any evidence, I shall be very happy to consider it. If it be a question of need, then, on the ground of need, it might be possible to give more, but, on actual wages earned, that is the information which we have, and until we have any evidence to the contrary we cannot alter the pension.