§ Mr. HORE-BELISHAasked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury to how many pre-War pensioners, showing categories, the Pensions (Increase) Act, 1924, applies; and what is the annual cost of the Act?
§ Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCEThe number of pensioners at present receiving increases of pension chargeable to the Exchequer under the Pensions (Increase) Acts, 1920 and 1924, and the analogous Army Warrants and Admiralty Orders in Council is as follows:
Civil Service … 7,471 Army and Navy … 17,288 Teachers … 2,223 Police (estimated) … 9,722 Royal Irish Constabulary … 3,464 Total … 40,168 The present annual cost of these increases to the Exchequer is approximately £660,000.
§ Mr. HORE-BELISHAasked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury how many pre-War pensioners of the cate- 1478W gories mentioned in the Pensions (Increase) Act, 1924, do not qualify on account of being under 60 years of age?
§ Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCENo precise figures are available, but it is believed that the number does not exceed 1,000. Some of these pensioners may be ineligible in any case on account of their means.
§ Mr. HORE-BELISHAasked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury what would be the total annual cost to the Treasury of placing the pre-War pensioners, referred to in the Pensions (Increase) Act, 1924, on the post-War scale of pensions, showing the calculations on which this would be based?
§ Mr. PETHICK LAWRENCEIt would be impossible to give any close or detailed estimate of the cost involved without recalculating individually some 40,000 pensions under nearly a dozen different pension scales, and even then in many cases the post-War equivalent of the salary on which the original pension was calculated would be a matter of hypothesis.
§ Mr. HORE-BELISHAasked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury what would be the cost of abolishing the means limit for those categories of pensioners who are covered by the Pensions (Increase) Acts?
§ Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCEThe Acts and the analogous Army Warrants and Admiralty Orders in Council apply to certain pensioners whose means, including their pensions, do not exceed £200 per annum in the case of married persons and £150 per annum in the case of unmarried persons. If the hon. Member proposes to abolish only the limit upon private means while maintaining the existing limits upon increasable pensions, it is believed that the cost to the Exchequer would be about £250,000 per annum. If he proposes also to abolish the limits on the pensions themselves, it is believed that the cost would be about £1,200,000 per annum.