HC Deb 30 March 1944 vol 398 cc1546-7
34. Mr. Tom Brown

asked the Minister of Pensions what is the minimum and maximum of income coming into the homes of parents who have applied for pension before the parents are designated to be in pecuniary need; what is the maximum income per unit of the household; is any consideration given to the infirm or crippled persons in the homes of the applicants; and whether any considerations are given to parents who have to pay towards members of the family who have been evacuated from the bombed areas.

The Minister of Pensions (Sir Walter Womersley)

The test of pecuniary need for the purposes of parents' pensions is not a fixed sum per unit of the household, but is a combined means limit, adapted to the circumstances of the particular household and taking account of the support previously given by the deceased son. For particulars of the Scheme I would refer the hon. Member to my answer to the hon. Member for Deritend (Sir S. Crooke) on 28th October last, of which I am sending him a copy. Special consideration would be given to any case in which the presence of an infirm or crippled person in the home, or the evacuation of a member of the household from a bombed area, necessarily involves the parents in additional expenditure.

Mr. Brown

Is the Minister aware that the economic circumstances of many of these homes are changed with dramatic suddenness in such a situation, and that the policy announced last week does not meet the value of the loss of human life?

Sir W. Womersley

I am aware of all these circumstances, and I am taking them into account. I think if the hon. Member will read the particulars I am sending him, he will change his opinion.

Mr. Rhys Davies

In view of the very strong feeling on this point, will the right hon. Gentleman take into account a proposition which has been made to him several times, and pay money to the parents by way of solace, as is done under workmen's compensation law?

Sir W. Womersley

I have indicated, over and over again, in this House, what is the Government's decision, and I cannot do more than that.

35. Mr. Hutchinson

asked the Minister of Pensions whether he has now a statement to make regarding accidents sustained by members of the Home Guard and by unpaid part-time Civil Defence personnel on journeys to and from duty.

Sir W. Womersley

I am glad to inform my hon. and learned Friend that I am now authorised to treat these persons as if they had been on duty when making journeys which would not have been undertaken except for the purpose of the public service, given by them as an addition to their normal employment. I am also able, on application, to review past rejections on this basis, and any resulting awards will begin from the first pay-day in April.

37. Mr. Hewlett

asked the Minister of Pensions whether any pension, and, if so, of what value, is granted to a widow not gainfully employed whose husband has been killed by one of our own shells.

Sir W. Womersley

The pension awarded in the circumstances stated is the same as that awarded to a widow whose husband was killed by enemy action. Where the husband was a Civil Defence member killed on duty, or a gainfully occupied person, the rate of pension is 26s. 8d. a week if the widow is over 40 years of age, or has dependent children who are eligible for allowances, or is incapable of self-support, and 20s. a week if none of these conditions is fulfilled. Additional allowances are payable for dependent children. The award is the same whether the widow was gainfully occupied or not.