OLD AGE PENSIONS

Press, Volume LIX, Issue 17732, 7 April 1923, Page 6

OLD AGE PENSIONS

PENSIONER DESIGNATED AS PAUPER. LABOUR RESENTMENT. j (nou 003 owm coeeebpohdeht.) LONDON, February 23. There was a lively debate in the House over a Labour motion in favour of the repeal of the provisions of th© Old Age Pensions Acts as to calculation of means. The object of the motion \yas to enable tho pensions to be given to people over 70 without their being disqualified by reason of personal provision lor old age and assistance from friends and organisations. Air Austin Hopkineon's criticism of the motion led to an angry scene. "Old-age pensions," he said, "are nothing less than outdoor relief under another name, and it seems to me a motion whoso intention is to put 1 the brand of pauperism on everyone is not a motion He was prevented from continuing by a fierce outburst of resentment from the Labour benches. Mr Westwood (Labour-Socialist, Peebles) excitedly exclaimed: "My father is an old-age pensioner, and he is aa good a man as you." Another Labour member shouted out: "He is a liar!" while a third called out, [ "He ought to b© made to withdraw 1" j ! and a fourth interjected with, "He is i placing a stigma on our class." i The Speaker interrupted to inform I members that they had the right to j reply, and the noise subsided, j Continuing, Mr Hopkinson said a pauper was one who was in receipt of i public assistance. At tliis there were I loud outcries from the Labour benches, Mr Itirfcwood and Mr Lansbury both and shouting defiantly at Mr Hopkinson. In the din it was impossible to distinguish what they were saying., The Speaker rose, and Mr ■ Lansbury resumed his seat, but it was some ■ time before Mr Kirkwood could Ibe persuaded by his colleagues to sit | down. The House, 6aid the Speaker, was dealing with a specific problem, and the hon. member was not entitled to develop a purely abstract argument. Mr Hopkinson: My desire Is to be of | service to the Labour Party. • (Labour laughter.) A number of have been addressed to me, and in the softness of my heart—(Labour cries of "Softness of your head!") —l hare endeavoured to be of mich sendee as I can. Have hon. members considered what would be tho effect if thia amendment were carried P It would mean an extra expenditure of fifteen or sixteen millions. Had they considered where that money was to come from ? Mr Eirltwood (Lab.-S'oo., Dumbarton): Where is the £25,000 for the 3>u(ke of York to came from ? Mr Hopkinson said that tho whole point of the amendment was where was the money to come from? What employers wanted was liquid enoital, and when taxation reached 6s in the pound, it wins not a tax on income but a tax: on capital. Mr J. H. Thomas's Retort. , Mr J. H. Thomas (Lab.-Soc., Derby) : said he did not propose to make any j comment on the taste or manners of j Mr Hopkinson, who must be the judge j of how far his description of a pauper j would help tho Government of the <lay.; The hon. member defined a pauper its i on© in receipt of public money. He could imagine tine alann that would I cause among the hon. member's friends. Mr Hopkinson rose, but there were loud shouta, from the Labour members of "Sit down," and "Don't give way, Thomas." Mr Thomas repeated that Mr Hopkinson haid said a pauper was one in receipt of public money. 'Mr Hopkinson: I said "In receipt of public assistance." Mr Thomas: Technically, there is no : difference, and when tbo non. member j is lecturing U9 on taste and manners, j let him remember that his description \ of a pauper includes soldiers and sailors j in receipt of public assistance. (Ministerial cries of "Oh!" and 'Labour cheers.) His definition applies to every ex-Lord Chancellor. I rreent his definition that a person who receives an old-age pension is a pauper. I. am not ashamed to say that the person who made tl:o greatest sacrifice for mo wont and drew her old-age pension. She rendered more service to the communit-y than ever you did. (Loud Labour cheers.) 230 to 208 Votes. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said that this motion would necessitate an immediate amendment of an« Act of Parliament, and this Government, or any other Government, could not undertake that. Although large progress had been made in recent years in the matter of relieving the aged of this. country, at this moment the Government could not see their way to do more. In the last ten . years the amount spent on this service in Great Britain had risen from £10,000,000 per annum to £23,000,000. This motion, if adopted, would entail a universal old-age pension, and that would mean an additional expenditure of £17,000,00<J a year. While the Government were causing distress by retrenchment it was perfectly impossible for them at the present time to undertake a fresh charge, however worthy and however much it might Sjjpeal to their best sentiments. "It cannot Bo done," he said, "and for no object, unless-—which God forbid—occasion should arise that this country should have once more to fight for its life, can we contemplate at present any increase in taxation." . Mr Baldwin rejected an appeal to leave the vote to the unfettered judgment of the House, and keep off the Whips, but in spits of this the GooS rn J? ent - secured a majority of Z2, the vote being for the motion 208 against 230. '