§ 29. Mr. RHYS DAVIESasked the Minister of Health whether his attention has been drawn to the appeal for a widow's pension by Mrs. Annie Geddes, reference W.P. 43,369/30. whose husband was in insurable employment from January, 1900, up to October, 1930, just prior to his death; if he is aware that the insurance department of the Ministry wrote to the man's employers on 6th January, 1931, and agreed to accept on 9th February, and the firm paid on 2nd March of that year, the sum of £21 9s. in satisfaction of arrears of contribution for 156 weeks; if, in view of this acceptance, he will 1963 authorise the payment to the widow of a pension or the money above six months' contributions which the Ministry could legally recover; and will he introduce amending regulations providing for the payment of a widow's pension in cases where it is accepted that the man was in insurable employment and the employers have paid the necessary contributions?
Sir H. YOUNGThe position is as stated in the second part of the question. I have no power to adopt the course suggested in the third part. The answer to the fourth part is in the negative. While liability to pay contributions is placed on the employer, there is also an obligation on the employé to produce his contribution card to the employer for stamping. Mr. Geddes did not present a card or take steps, at any time in the 18 years during which he was insurable, to bring to light his employer's failure to pay contributions.
§ Mr. DAVIESWill the right hon. Gentleman look into the question again and see whether it is not possible, when insurance contributions are accepted by the Ministry and a claim for pension is turned down, that contributions which have been wrongly paid are handed back to the widow?
Sir H. YOUNGI have given the most careful consideration to the case. If the suggested amendment to the regulations were adopted, the income of the Pension Fund would be jeopardised, for such an arrangement would obviously offer an inducement to employers to refrain from making any contribution until they were actually required to do so in order to make good the pension claim.
§ Mr. HANNONOn a point of Order. May I ask, for the guidance of the House, whether questions of this quality, which deal with a single individual, could not be dealt with more effectively between the hon. Gentleman and the Minister by correspondence instead of wasting the time of the House?
§ Mr. DAVIESIs a Member not entitled, when he has exhausted every other means with the Department and under the law, to raise an issue of this kind on the floor of the House?
§ Mr. SPEAKERHon. Members must always judge for themselves on these questions.