HC Deb 30 October 1911 vol 30 cc669-70W

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether the Treasury has stated that officers denied on medical grounds the benefits of the Superannuation Act, 1909, would have their cases reconsidered if they secured acceptance as first-class lives by a good insurance company; if so, is he aware that a sorting-clerk and telegraphist at Liverpool, who has fulfilled these conditions, has been required to undergo a further medical examination by a practitioner nominated by the Treasury, conditionally upon the expense being borne by the applicant; that, the examination having taken place at the officer's own expense, the application was again refused as was also the request for a copy of the report of such medical examination; and, whether, as two medical men have reported in favour of the officer, and two, one the local medical officer to the Post Office and the other the nominee of the Treasury, have reported against him, some steps will be taken to allow the officer to benefit by the provisions of the Superannuation Act?


The Treasury undertook to look further into cases of the kind referred to, but gave no pledge beyond this. In the case of the Liverpool officer indicated, it was felt absolutely necessary to obtain further medical evidence. It was accordingly arranged that the officer should be examined by a practitioner who, though nominated by the Treasury, had no relation to the Department, and was selected solely as an independent and experienced physician. The report of the latter was adverse, and I regret to be unable to reopen the case.