HC Deb 20 July 1910 vol 19 cc1387-91W
Mr. LYNCH

asked the Secretary lip the Treasury whether, in reference to the claim for an old age pension by Mrs. Mary Conlan, of Attichristora, Lahinch, county Clare, No. 1,104 in committee's register, No. L.H. 5 in pension officer's register, he will take note that owing to her illness her application in November, 1908, was not accurate in details; whether it is agreed that she is now seventy-two years of age and in all respects entitled to the pension, except for the objection that at the age of fifty she went to Australia to her friends for the benefit of her health and remained there ten years; and whether, in view of the fact that except for this period she has lived in Ireland and has been resident there for the last twelve years, he will consider her entitled to the pension?

Mr. HOBHOUSE

In the course of investigating this case the pension officer ascertained that Mrs. Conlan had resided in the United Kingdom for the past nine years, and that before that she had for a long time resided in Australia. He accordingly reported against the claim, on the ground that the claimant did not fulfil the statutory condition as regards residence in the United Kingdom (Section 2 (2) of the Old Age Pensions Act). The claim was disallowed by the local pension committee, and, on appeal by the claimant, by the Local Government Board also. I have no power to revise the decision.

Payable from the Local Taxation (Scotland) Account.

Mr. EDMUND HARVEY

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will undertake, in the forthcoming Bill on old age pensions, to remove the existing disabilities attaching to persons who, though otherwise qualified, are debarred from receiving a pension on the ground that they have resided in the British Colonies during the last twenty years?

Mr. HOBHOUSE

My right hon. Friend has already undertaken to consider this point.

Mr. THOMAS F. SMYTH

asked the Secretary to the Treasury why it is that John Oates, of Drumsna, county Leitrim, in the Carrick-on-Shannon sub-pension district, has been deprived of his pension, although it has been proved that the man is over seventy years; and if his case will be reconsidered?

Mr. HOBHOUSE

I am informed that John Oates has not been deprived of his pension, as suggested by the hon. Member, but that he failed to prove his title to one. The pension officer reported against the claim on the ground that there was no proof that John Oates was seventy years of age; and on appeal the claim was disallowed by the Local Government Board. It is open to John Oates to prefer a fresh claim, supported by any evidence of age which he now possesses.

Mr. HACKETT

asked the grounds on which Mary Fanning, Stradavoher Street, Thurles, was refused an old age pension by the pension officer at Thurles; whether Mary Fanning has been living apart from her husband for the last ten years; and whether she has any visible means of support?

Mr. HOBHOUSE

A pension was in the first instance granted by the local pension committee in November, 1908; but almost immediately afterwards the officer obtained information which suggested that Mrs. Fanning had shared in the Poor Law relief granted to her husband during the quarter ended 31st March, 1908, and was in consequence disqualified for the receipt of a pension. A question was accordingly raised by the officer on 13th December, 1908. There is no record in the officer's book of any decision by the committee on this question, and though the officer has twice applied to the clerk for a copy of the committee's decision he has failed to obtain it. I am causing further inquiry to be made in the matter and will communicate with the hon. Member.

Mr. HACKETT

also asked the grounds on which Mrs. Mary Heffernan, Ballymore, Cashel, county Tipperary, was refused an old age pension by the pension officer?

Mr. HOBHOUSE

The pension officer reported against this claim on the ground that the claimant was, at the time of investigation, in receipt of Poor Law relief, and the claim was disallowed by the local pension committee on this ground.

Mr. LYNCH

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that Mrs. Bridget Hastings, of O'Connell Street, Kilkee, county Clare, Ireland, was granted an old age pension in 1909, but that the pension was withdrawn on 23rd June, 1910; whether the ground of withdrawal was a statement that Mrs. Hastings had forfeited her right to the pension by a residence in the United States of America; whether he is aware that her absence in America was due to an invitation from her daughter on account of her health, but that she never had any permanent residence in that country nor undertook there any remunerative work; and whether, under these circumstances, the pension may be again allowed to Mrs, Hastings?

Mr. HOBHOUSE

The facts are as stated in the first two parts of the question. The pension was revoked by the local pension committee as the result of a question raised by the pension officer on the ground that, during her eight years' continuous absence in America, Mrs. Hastings had not retained a home in the United Kingdom.

Mr. SHEEHAN

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether the old age pension of Mary Hickey, Inches, Rath-more, was stopped owing to the fact that documentary evidence of age was not forthcoming; was the age of this woman subsequently found in the Millstreet Union Census of 1851, proving her to be at present seventy-three years old; did the Millstreet Pension Committee then grant her the full pension; if so, will he state why it is not now paid to her; and what are the grounds of appeal, if any such has been lodged by the pension officer?

Mr. BIRRELL

The Local Government Board disallowed Mary Hickey's pension as she failed to produce satisfactory evidence that she had attained the statutory age. She subsequently lodged a fresh claim, and the pension sub-committee allowed her a pension, but the pension officer appealed on the ground that the evidence of age was insufficient. The Board, however, on the 13th instant, decided that Mrs. Hickey was entitled to a pension.

Mr. SHEEHAN

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether the Dunmanway Pension Sub-committee, after a full investigation of his claim, made a pension allowance of 3s. per week to Timothy Crowley, Anaherlick, Coppeen, Enniskean; whether this man has now no inte- rest in the farm formerly held by him, it being made over to his son under a marriage settlement; and, seeing that he is qualified as to age, will he explain the grounds on which the Local Government Board reversed the decision of the Dunmanway Sub-committee and refused the pension; and what further steps it is intended to take in the matter?

Mr. BIRRELL

I understand that in October last, shortly before making a claim for a pension, Timothy Crowley made over by deed to one of his sons his well-stocked holding of thirty-three acres, in return for a sum of money, and an annuity of £11 per annum for himself and another son, together with their feeding, clothing, and maintenance for life. The Sub-Committee allowed a pension of 3s. per week, but the Local Government Board, on appeal, disallowed the claim, as they considered that Crowley's means exceeded the statutory limit. It is not open to the Board to reconsider their decision.