Clause 1.—(SUPPLEMENTARY ALLOWANCES AND PENSIONS.) (Hansard, 18 February 1954)

§ Sir David Campbell (Belfast, South)
While I strongly support the Clause in general, I very much regret that subsection (2, a) has been included. On Second Reading I endeavoured to put a case for the widows who had married after their husbands had left the Royal Irish Constabulary. Many of these widows have written to me and to my Ulster colleagues pleading for help. They rightly claim that their husbands gave most courageous and most loyal service 2226 to the British Government. They point out that other widows, whose husbands gave similar service, are drawing pensions.
I understand that other pension schemes provide that a widow should be granted a pension only if her husband was serving when they were married, but I submit that the case of the R.I.C. widows is a special one and deserves special consideration. Their husbands did not leave the Royal Irish Constabulary of their own free will. They were compelled to do so because the force, which had given such magnificent service to the Crown, was disbanded.
I appeal to the Joint Under-Secretary of State to delete paragraph (2, a) from the Bill.

§ Mrs. Patricia Ford (Down, North)
I should like to support all that my hon. Friend the Member for Belfast, South (Sir D. Campbell) has said about these unfortunate widows. They are those who married after their husbands had left the Royal Irish Constabulary. Clause 1 (2, a) says that in order to qualify for a pension a woman must have married while her husband was serving in the Royal Irish Constabulary.
I realise that it is seldom possible to remove all anomalies and that a line has to be drawn somewhere, but if hon. Members had read some of the pathetic, heart-rending letters which I have received this week, since the Second Reading of the Bill, I think they would appreciate that it seems only right for a voice to be raised and a plea made on their behalf. I do not wish to delay the House by quoting from any particular letter, for the tone of each of them is the same.
Their claim—and I feel it is a strong one—is that, although they married after their husbands had left the R.I.C., they should nevertheless be entitled to a pension. There cannot be many of these women left, and the extra burden on the Exchequer would surely be very small. Some of the facts revealed in their letters show that they are living on the verge of starvation. One woman, living in the 2227 south of Ireland, disclosed that all she had in the world was £1 a week from the Eire Government. After paying a rent of 8s. for her house, she was left with only 12s. for all her food, clothing and everything else. She was existing on dry bread and tea.
These women justly claim that their husbands courageously and loyally served the British Government through most dangerous and difficult times. In many cases, the duties they performed seriously undermined their health and sometimes even shortened their lives.
It would, of course, be unreasonable to give a pension to a widow whose husband served in the R.I.C. for only a short time. I therefore submit that the suggestion made by my hon. Friend the Member for Belfast, South in the Second Reading debate for a 10-year minimum service would be a fair compromise as a qualifying period for the pension. I urge the Government to accept that suggestion.

§ The Joint Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Sir Hugh Lucas-Tooth)
I appreciate that my hon. Friends have been speaking about individual cases of hardship. However, I am afraid that I cannot hold out any hope that it will be possible to introduce an Amendment on the lines they suggest. The provision to which they refer is one which existed in the Royal Irish Constabulary Regulations. It occurs in all the police pensions regulations in force in this country. I think it applies in all pensions regulations and schemes, and it certainly applies to the Civil Service.
My hon. Friend the Member for Belfast, South (Sir D. Campbell) sought to distinguish these cases from others. He said that the service was disbanded and, therefore, the husbands had left the service for reasons beyond their own control. It is true that that is a special circumstance affecting the service, but it is not a special circumstance affecting those who leave any service. It is not possible, I am afraid, to make an exception of the kind to which my hon. Friend referred. In the circumstances, I must tell him that it will not be possible to make any alteration.