§ 59. Mr. Bateyasked the Minister of Health whether he will appoint a committee to inquire into the working of the appeals tribunals for widows' and orphans and old age pensions, seeing that the tribunals have refused 91,921 applications for pensions during the last 10 years?
§ Mr. ElliotI am afraid that I cannot agree that the fact that in 91,921 cases in the last 10 years the referees have found that the departmental decision appealed against was in accordance with the law affords any ground for the appointment of a committee for the purpose suggested by the hon. Member. In a very large number of cases the appellants can only be supposed to have appealed because of their failure to appreciate the exact requirements of the relevant statutory provisions.
§ Mr. BateyAs there is a feeling that widows' and old age pensioners have such a difficulty in getting a favourable decision from the tribunal, would it not be advisable to have an inquiry into the working of the tribunal?
§ Mr. ElliotNo, Sir. I think the fact that the figures show how few cases succeed upon appeal is an indication of how thoroughly the work is done in the first instance.
§ Commander MarsdenWill my right hon. Friend reconsider that decision, and, further, direct such an inquiry to go into the causes which lead to the continued delay in awarding old age pensions when the applications have been allowed?
§ Mr. ElliotI cannot agree that there is continued delay in awarding old age pensions, and I do not think that there is a case for the appointment of such a committee as has been suggested.
§ Commander MarsdenIf I give my right hon. Friend details of a case, will he inquire into it and see that the procedure is speeded up?
§ Mr. ElliotCertainly, if my hon. and gallant Friend gives me details of any case I shall be glad to have inquiries made.
§ Mr. PalingIf it is the case, as brought forward by my hon. Friend the Member for Spennymoor (Mr. Batey) last week, that 91,000 appeals failed, is it not time that something was done to alter the position?
§ Mr. ElliotThe appeal was in strict accordance with the law. One hon. Member is suggesting an alteration of the Statute and the hon. Member himself is suggesting an alteration in the procedure, and the two are quite different.
60. Mr. Andersonasked the Minister of Health the number of pensions at 65 years 2446 of age and widows' pensions, respectively, which have been refused to applicants owing to the restriction imposed by Section 6 (3) of the Contributory Pensions Act, 1929, during the last two years?
§ Mr. ElliotI regret that the information asked for by the hon. Member is not available. I would, however, point out that the restriction to which he refers is considerably modified by regulations made under the provisions now incorporated in Section 32 of the Contributory Pensions Act, 1936. Under these regulations, contributions in respect of insurable employment paid after the date on which title to pension arises are, to the extent laid down in the regulations, regarded as having been paid at the proper time.
Mr. AndersonDoes not the Minister say that cases have been before his own Department, and is he not able to give particulars of the number of cases during the last 12 months or two years? Surely it is possible to give the cases which have been under the notice of his Department?
§ Mr. ElliotNo, Sir, not without making special inquiries.
Mr. AndersonMay I ask that information should be obtained, in view of the importance of the matter for which we require the figures?
§ Mr. ElliotI will give that point my consideration, but the Departments are all working under very great strain at present.
§ Mr. MathersIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that a figure was put upon this position in respect of Scotland by the Secretary of State for Scotland? Surely he will not fall behind Scotland.
§ 62. Mr. Bateyasked the Minister of Health why, in the case of the wife of a man who reaches 65 years of age and whose husband is in receipt of an old age pension, and who produce's her birth certificate and her marriage certificate, she is refused an old age pension when the Ministry cannot prove that her marriage 39 years ago was illegal?
§ Mr. ElliotI would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I made on 15th June to a question asked by him regarding this case. As I then stated, this lady's claim to an old age pension was rejected because she was not shown to have been the legal wife of the man on. whose insurance her claim was based, 2447 nor had she herself the necessary insurance qualifications. The referees have confirmed that this decision was in accordance with the law, and neither I nor the referees have power to award a pension where the conditions laid down in the Statute are not shown to be satisfied.
§ Mr. BateyIn view of the fact that this woman was married to her husband 39 years ago, may I ask whether the Minister has any proof that the marriage was illegal? He should either prove that the marriage was illegal or pay her the pension.
§ Mr. ElliotThat question has been placed before the competent authorities, who have decided against the view put forward by the hon. Member.
§ Mr. StephenWill the Minister arrange for a case to be taken to the High Court?
§ Mr. BuchananMay I ask the Minister to do two things: first, in view of the fact that the criminal authorities have decided that there is no case for prosecution, and therefore no case that the woman is not legally married, have the case considered by the referees on these facts; and, secondly, ask the referees to consider granting the woman the right to appeal to the King's Bench Division?
§ Mr. ElliotThe question of law has been considered by the competent authority laid down by the Statute, and the matter is now disposed of. Therefore I do not think I can adopt either of the courses suggested by the hon. Member.
§ Mr. BateyThe Minister says that the question has been settled by the proper authority. Will he tell us how many persons were present in the court, and whether it was not decided by one gentleman? Had the woman any chance of attending?
§ Mr. ElliotI could not go into those details now. The hon. Member himself said some time ago that he would be raising the case on the Adjournment, when obviously we shall have more time.
§ Mr. BateyYes, but the Prime Minister prevents me from doing so by moving the suspension of the Eleven o'clock Rule.