Dependants' Allowance (Hansard, 21 September 1943)

§ 33. Captain Strickland
asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that owing to the payment of a grant' of 7s. 6d. per week from a fund collected amongst the employees of Alfred Herbert, Limited, to 14411192 Lance-Corporal D. Townsend of the Royal Armoured Corps, his mother has had her dependant's allowance reduced by the full amount of this payment, in spite of the fact that she does not benefit in any way from this voluntary contribution, and whether he will take steps to alter this system?

§ Sir J. Grigg
A dependant's allowance can be granted only where, prior to his enlistment, a soldier has been contributing to the support of a dependant at a rate which he cannot afford to continue out of his Army pay and the dependant would consequently be placed in a state of hardship. It is thus necessary to consider the extent to which the soldier is still able to contribute towards the support of his dependant and to take into account any income or assistance which the dependant receives. It would not, I regret, be possible to disregard income on the grounds that it represented voluntary contributions without creating indefensible anomalies.

§ Captain Strickland
Is it suggested that the whole amount that is allowed by the employees of this firm to this young fellow should be regarded as available for the support of his mother, and that the whole amount should be deducted from the allowance made to her?

§ Sir J. Grigg
There are certain ranges of income which qualify for certain ranges of allowance. Subject to that, the answer is "Yes."

§ Mr. Gallacher
Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this scurvy treatment of the dependants of the soldiers is causing the most bitter feeling in every part of the country and will he not adopt a more humane attitude towards the mothers of the lads who are doing the fighting?

§ Sir J. Grigg
Judging from my own letter bag, I do not think that the intense indignation is very widespread and I do not admit that the treatment is scurvy.

§ Mr. Kirkwood
In regard to the discontent in this matter, is the right hon. Gentleman aware that' the Clyde is up against this very same question, where payments from a voluntary fund got up in John Brown's are being deducted from the mother's allowance. It is causing grave discontent. The right hon. Gentleman can ask Harold Balfour; he knows all about it.

§ 37. Mr. Parker
asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that the London price of milk figure has been fixed for the area covered by the London Trade Board rates for dairy employees, and that this higher price has therefore to be paid by the wives of serving men in London outside the London postal area; and what action does he propose to take to extend the area within which special allowances are paid?

§ Sir J. Grigg
The so-called London allowance, to which my hon. Friend is doubtless referring, is given to soldiers' families living in the London postal area on account of the high rents in that area. It is not related in any way to the price of milk, I am aware that the restriction of this allowance to that area gives rise to anomalies, but any extension of the area would equally create anomalies. It is therefore considered that the issue of the allowance should not be extended. War Service Grants, administered by the Ministry of Pensions, are available to supplement family allowance in cases where families have to pay especially high rents or meet other special expenses.

§ Mr. Parker
Is it not very unreasonable that for this purpose a very small area should be taken, while for other purposes, affecting prices, the Greater London area is taken?

§ Sir J. Grigg
I rather hesitate, in view of some earlier questions, to embark on a discussion of what is reasonable and what is unreasonable. But the question has been thoroughly considered by other Departments, and they are all in agreement that to extend the area would create at least as many anomalies as exist now.

§ Sir Herbert Williams
Is my right hon. Friend aware that the boundary divides my constituency, and that the people nearer to London get the special allowance, while those further from London do not? There is no sense at all in it.