§ It is always open to any person in receipt of a pension or who has been refused a pension under previous Regulations to apply for further consideration. In these cases the respective applications should be made as follows:
- Soldiers—Ministry of Pensions, Royal Hospital, Chelsea.
- Sailors—Ministry of Pensions, Great George Street, S.W.
- Widows and Dependants—Ministry of Pensions, 45, Grosvenor Road, S.W.
- Officers and their widows and dependants—Ministry of Pensions, Great George Street, S.W.
§ Mr. HOGGEasked the Pensions Minister if there is any fixed minimum gratuity for men not eligible for pension; and, if so, what is the amount?
§ Mr. BARNESI have nothing to add to the answer given to my hon. Friend on the 27th March, and my statement to the House on the 17th instant.
§ Mr. JOWETTasked the Financial Secretary to the War Office if he is aware that regimental paymasters' inquiries directed to wives and dependants of soldiers are accompanied by an intimation that the answer must be prepaid; and if, having regard to the slender resources of a large proportion of the persons concerned in these inquiries, he will arrange for replies to be returnable post free, especially in view of the fact that inquiries emanating from Government Departments concerning commercial, industrial, and taxation questions, which are directed mostly to persons of the middle and upper classes, are accompanied by envelopes in which replies may be sent post free?
§ Mr. ILLINGWORTHMy hon. Friend has asked me to answer this question. I am aware of the intimation in question, which is in accordance with the general rule stated on page 49 of the Post Office Guide. I am not sure that there is a case for following in respect of the inquiries to which the hon. Member refers the practice of enclosing an official paid cover, which is followed in respect of some other inquiries made by local officers of Government. But I will look into the matter and will communicate with the hon. Member.
2609W
§ Mr. KENNEDYasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether any pension is being paid to Driver Philip Smith, late of the Army Service Corps, No. T4,093,020; what was the original pension; when was the same granted; and what is the present pension?
Sir A. GRIFFITH BOSCAWENDriver Philip Smith was granted on the 6th July last a pension for 18 months, final, of 4s. 8d. a week, on the report of a medical board that his disability was neither caused nor aggravated by military service. His ease has been reviewed, and he has been granted a conditional pension for six months of 13s. 9d. a week, with 8s. 9d. in respect of his children, or 22s. 6d. a week in all, with the appropriate arrears from the 6th July.
§ Mr. H. P. HARRISasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether his attention has been called to the case of Mrs. Sandwell, wife of R. Sandwell, engine-room artificer, Royal Navy, who is separated from her husband and has a maintenance order of £2 a week against him; whether the Admiralty refuse to issue any separation allowance to Mrs. Sandwell although the compulsory allotment of 5s. a week has been made; whether he is aware that if the man had enlisted in the Army instead of the Navy the compulsory allotment would have carried with it separation allowance for the wife with ordinary rates for children; and whether steps will be taken to remedy the injustice caused by the different treatment accorded to the separated wives of sailors as compared with those of soldiers?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAIt is true that Mrs. Sandwell, wife of E. Sandwell, engine-room artificer, Royal Navy, who is separated from her husband, has a maintenance order of £2 a week against him and that separation allowance has been refused to Mrs. Sandwell, although her husband made a voluntary allotment of 5s. a week from his pay, which is sufficient to carry the usual rate of separation allowance in normal cases. It is also true that, if the man had enlisted in the Army, a compulsory allotment would have carried with it the ordinary rate of separation allowance for a wife and her children, if any; but in comparing the practice of the two Services it must be remembered that rates of pay in the Navy are often, as in the case of Sandwell, sufficient to enable a man to maintain his pre-2610W entry contribution to a separated wife in full, which is not normally the case as regards soldiers. In these circumstances there is no intention of taking any steps to alter Admiralty practice and thus enable a man to transfer his civil liabilities to the Crown simply by refusing to discharge them. I may add that Sandwell has recently been placed under a compulsory allotment which, in the case of men of his rating, is at the rate of 7s. a week, and that if he were willing to allot 30s. a week as he is quite able to do, the Admiralty would make good the difference of 10s between that sum and the amount of the magistrate's order.
§ Mr. HOGGEasked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether his attention has been called to the practice whereby dependants of soldiers have their allowances reduced owing to errors of paymasters overpaying and then recovering and also of recovering debts from soldiers from their wives' allowances; whether he recognises the hardship to the dependants; and will he take steps to place the responsibility for such overpayments on the shoulders of those responsible?
§ Mr. FORSTERFull consideration is given to the circumstances of each case, including the degree of responsibility attaching to the issuing officer, 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. There is no practice of recovering the soldier's debts from his wife's allowance.
§ Mr. KENNEDYasked the Under-Secretary of State for War why no dependant's allowance has been paid to Mrs. E. M' Kenna, Dingins, Losset, county Cavan, mother of Private E. M 'Kenna, No. 24,109, Royal Irish Fusiliers; and, as this soldier enlisted 22nd March, 1916, and was at the time supporting his mother, will instructions be given to also pay arrears due to date?
§ Mr. FORSTERMrs. M'Kenna's claim for dependant's separation allowance in respect of her son was disallowed as prior dependence could not be established, and she was so informed on the 3rd instant. If she is dissatisfied with this finding, she can appeal on a form obtainable at any post office.