§ Mr. Nicholas Wintertonasked the Secretary of State for Defence what recent representations he has received concerning variations in the treatment of pre-and post-31st March 1975 war widows' pensions.
§ Mr. JuddThe term " war widows pension " properly refers to benefits payable under the scheme operated by the Department of Health and Social Security, but I take it that the hon. Gentleman is referring to the disparity in treatment between the widows of officers and servicemen killed on duty before and after 31st March 1973 with regard to payment of occupational pensions by the Ministry of Defence.
Many representations have been received. In general they urge " parity ". that is the principle that every war widow—regardless of the date of her husband's death or of whether he was a Regular, a volunteer or a National Service man—should receive all the benefits, according to rank, payable under the current Armed Forces Pension Scheme, for 47W instance to the widow of a soldier killed in Northern Ireland.
Such parity is precluded for reasons both of principle and cost. The present Forces Pension Scheme is scaled to the other conditions of service for currently serving personnel and, like all improved pension arrangements in the public sector, unfortunately cannot be retrospectively applied.
§ Mr. Nicholas Wintertonasked the Secretary of State for Defence what representations have been made to his Department since 1952 about the need to amend the regulations governing forces family widows' pensions; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. JuddThe hon. Member is no doubt referring to the situation of those widows of regular servicemen below the rank of Warrant Officer Class I—or equivalent—who retired or died before 1st September 1950. This group did not benefit from the revision of the Armed Forces Pension Scheme which was announced in 1952, with an effective date of 1st September 1950, and which introduced a pension entitlement for all the widows of Regular Service men, regardless of rank, subject to certain conditions. Many representations have been received since 1952. I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave to the hon. Member for Gosport (Mr. Viggers) on 27th October last for a full statement of the reasons why no change has been made to amend the disparity in treatment.—[Vol. 898, c.337.]