§ Mr. CRUMLEYasked the Secretary of State for War why a separation allowance has not been granted to Rose Ellen Teevan, of Munachybane, Garrison, county Fermanagh, sister and dependant of Private J. Teevan, No. 25419, who made her an allotment, and lodged a form claim- 1345W ing separation allowance on 16th December, 1915; and will he take steps to have the claim investigated and the proper allowance made as soon as possible?
§ Mr. FORSTERInquiries are being made, and the hon. Member will be informed of the result in due course.
§ Mr. PERCY HARRIS (Paddington, S.)asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that wives and dependants of soldiers and sailors are frequently unable to obtain their allowances and pensions because the necessary draft books have not been sent to the post offices; and whether, as omissions to send draft books punctually occur every quarter, he will take steps to remedy what is causing hardship?
§ Mr. FORSTERMy attention had already been drawn to this matter, and I am having inquiries made into some specific complaints of such delay in the case of Army allowances and pensions, and any steps necessary to remedy it shall be taken. Perhaps my right hon. Friend the Financial Secretary to the Admiralty could reply as far as sailors are concerned.
Mr. BARLOWasked the Secretary of State for War whether the interim grants in the case of discharged men of 10s. and 20s. are now abolished and an interim grant of 14s. and two weeks' separation allowance is substituted for it in all cases; and whether, seeing that the new interim arrangement is likely to cause confusion, he will consider the desirability of continuing the soldier's pay with ration allowance and separation allowance till the pension is fixed?
§ Mr. FORSTERThe new arrangement has already come into effect, and as far as I am aware no confusion exists. I fear I cannot make the further modification suggested.
§ Mr. JOWETTasked the Financial Secretary to the War Office if he is aware that in a number of cases soldiers' dependants have been called upon to repay, by means of weekly deductions from their separation allowances, amounts which have been overpaid to them through the fault of the regimental paymasters or Army pay officers; if he knows that in some instances large sums have to be repaid in this manner which have been innocently received and economically spent for the benefit of their young 1346W children and the welfare of the household by poor people, although afterwards, when repayment has been imposed upon them by means of reduced separation allowances, every member of their households have been obliged to endure long periods of privation and want through no fault of their own; and whether he will put a stop to this practice of enforcing repayment in the circumstances mentioned in view of the fact that no respectable business firm would attempt to recover from poor persons in similar cases?
§ Mr. FORSTERFull consideration is. given to the circumstances of each case before any recovery is decided upon, and such recovery as is found necessary is effected by small instalments spread over such period as to avoid hardship.
§ Mr. WATTasked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether it is the rule of his Department that no allowance is given to the parents of a soldier who joined the Colours early in the War if his wage was under 10s. a week, but an allowance is given to the parents of a soldier who delayed joining the Colours until his wage reached the 10s. a week or more; and, seeing that this amounts to penalising the most patriotic soldier, whether any remedy is proposed in these cases?
§ Mr. FORSTERAll these considerations were no doubt fully before the Select Committee which determined that the basis of separation allowance should be the actual facts existing before enlistment.
§ Mr. BYRNEasked the President of the Local Government Board if he has any funds at his disposal to meet such emergencies as rent, doctors' fees, and subsistence for soldiers who have been discharged without any pension and unable to work owing to wounds and sickness contracted during military service; if so, if such is applicable to men discharged from Irish regiments; if the method adopted in the distribution of public funds in Ireland, particularly in Dublin, proved to be most unsatisfactory, and families allowed to drift into utter degradation and hunger; if his special attention has been drawn to this matter by a man named Mates, who has been peculiarly subjected to such harsh and unjust treatment owing to the fact that he was receiving no pension; and if he will, in order to allay the discontent that prevails, consider the advisability of having such 1347W relief distributed in future by unprejudiced Government officials, and cause inquiry to be made into the refusal to render this man assistance?
§ Mr. DUKEThe duty of affording relief to discharged soldiers would seem to lie at present with the Statutory Committee and the local committees constituted under the Naval and Military War Pensions Act, 1915. The Local Government Board have no funds at their disposal out of which assistance can be given in such cases. Their attention does not appear to have been drawn to the specific case named in the question.
Mr. BARLOWasked the Minister for Labour whether Private W. G. Quin was discharged on 15th April, 1916, after 189 days' service in the Royal Engineers, 66th East Lancashire Division, with exemplary character, as no longer fit for war service; whether be is aware that he has a wife and nine children, and that the£1 a week allowed to Quin by the Chelsea Commissioners down to about the end of June was then suddenly stopped, and a demand for£11 overpayment has now been made; whether he is aware that Quin is only capable of light and occasional work; and whether it is still suggested that the£11 should be refunded?
§ Mr. FORSTERInquiries are being made and I will inform my hon. Friend of the result in due course.
Mr. BARLOWasked the Minister for Labour whether he is aware that Corporal J. Noden, No. 3625, late 8th Lancashire Fusiliers, Territorial Force, of 3, Hodson Street, Salford, was discharged on 16th March, 1916, after 326 days' service as no longer physically fit for service; that he is a married man with eight children under sixteen years of age; that, owing to asthma contracted in, or aggravated by, Army service, he is incapable of work, and has been so found by his trade union; and whether the Chelsea Commissioners have refused to make any grant of pension?
§ Mr. FORSTERThis man was discharged after 326 days' service, all at home. He was not subjected to any exceptional hardship or exposure, and, as the Commissioners were advised by the medical authorities that the disability was neither caused nor aggravated by military service, they were unable to award him a pension.