HC Deb 16 January 1913 vol 46 cc2272-3W

next asked the Chief Secretary why the Local Government Board on appeal awarded only 3s. per week old age pension to Mary Roche, Fisherhill, Turlough, county Mayo, although she had no means of livelihood except that afforded her by her son, a small landholder whose rent is only £2 l1s. per year; was Mr. Hassett, the pension officer who first dealt with her case, so overburdened with work at the time that the Foxford Pension Sub-Committee applied to his department to provide him with an assistant; what pension officers had to deal with Mrs. Roche's case since Mr. Hassett left the district, and do their reports and Mr. Hassett's agree as to the claimant's means; has any of Mr. Hassett's successors reported that the claimant is entitled to a full pension of 5s. per week according to his estimate of her means; and will he, in the circumstances, ask the Local Government Board to have the case investigated by one of their inspectors?


The Local Government Board refused Mary Roche's application for an increase of pension from 3s. to 5s. on appeal by the pension officer as they estimated that her means exceeded £23 12s. 6d. a year. Pension officers are not under my control, and I am therefore unable to say what particular pension officers dealt with her case. So far as the Board's records show, none of the pension officers recommended the increase of the claimant's pension to 5s., but, on the contrary, appealed against the higher amount in each case. The Board have no power to reopen consideration of her case.