HC Deb 16 February 1911 vol 21 cc1404-5W
Mr. HACKETT

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he can state the cause of the delay in considering the application of Michael Kennedy, Tourbrien, Newport, county Tipperary, for an old age pension, seeing that the application was made in the usual way last November, and that the applicant wrote to the pension officer on 18th January inquiring the result of his application?

Mr. HOBHOUSE

Michael Kennedy's claim, the second that he has made, is dated 3rd December, 1910. At the time it was received the pension officer was busily engaged in investigating claims from persons applying for pensions in anticipation of the lapse of the poor relief disqualification; and, seeing that the local pension committee and the Local Government Board had already declared Kennedy to be disqualified for the receipt of a pension, his second claim was held over for a time. It will be submitted to the committee as early as possible. I am informed that the pension officer did not receive the inquiry referred to at the end of the question.

Mr. GUINEY

asked the Chief Secretary whether a pension was granted to Andrew Lucey, of Castleisland, county Kerry, and paid to him from January to June, 1910; and will he state what was the cause of the payment being then stopped?

Mr. BIRRELL

Andrew Lucey appears to have been awarded a pension from the 1st of January, 1909, which was, however, discontinued by the Local Government Board in September, 1909, on a question raised by the pension officer on the ground that Lucey's wife was in receipt of Poor Law relief. A further claim made by Lucey is now before the Board on an appeal by him against a decision of the local pension sub-committee disallowing it. It is stated that his wife is still in receipt of relief, and if this proves to be the case the Board will be obliged to disallow his claim again.

Mr. GUINEY

asked the Chief Secretary whether his attention has been called to the application of Bridget Dahill, Charleville, county Cork, for an old age pension, which, when considered by the local subcommittee, was twice granted but was disallowed on appeal, although, on the last occasion, she produced a sworn declaration of a woman over ninety years who testified that Mrs. Dahill was over seventy years, she having known her since childhood; and, seeing that her application has again been decided in her favour, will he recommend the granting of the pension, having regard to the fact that the pension officer agrees with the decision of the committee, but according to the regulations he is compelled to appeal?

Mr. BIRRELL

There have been two appeals to the Local Government Board in the case referred to. In June, 1909, the Board upheld the appeal of the pension officer against a decision of the Charleville Pension Sub-committee awarding Bridget Dahill a pension of five shillings a week on the ground that she had failed to show she was seventy years of age. The papers relating to this claim are not now in the Board's possession. A fresh claim is now under their consideration on appeal, but they have not yet completed their inquiries respecting it. The pension officer has not reported to them that he agrees with the committee's decision awarding a pension in the case.