EXPLANATION BY MINISTER

Press, Volume LXXVI, Issue 23086, 31 July 1940, Page 10

EXPLANATION BY MINISTER

“ADEQUATE PROVISION MADE” REHABILITATION PLAN TO BE CONSIDERED [From Our Parliamentary Reporter.] WELLINGTON, July 30. "I think that every member will agree that improvements are necessary, and that the legislation makes adequate provision for men serving either overseas or in the Dominion,” said the Minister for Defence (the Hon F. Jones) after explaining the provisions of the War Pensions Amendment Bill and the War en sions Extension Bill when they appeared for their second reading m the House of Representatives to-day. The bills were passed at the afternoon sitting. . . , .. The war pension legislation since us introduction 25 years ago was ieviewed bv the Minister, who saiJ mat in the Intelvening period improvements had been made which* in nio opinion, made the New _ Zealand provisions among the best in the British Commonwealth. The War Veterans Allowance Act was, passed in 1935 to meet the position of men wno broke down but were unable to prove that their ill-health was due to war service. The cost of war pensions m 1921 was £1.886,952, and to-day there were 25,923 war pensioners and veterans, costing annually £1,886,537, indicating that though many returned soldiers had died and their dependants passed the age of benefit, increased pension rates had been granted. The total cost to date since the passing of the War Pensions Act in 1915 was £29,524,336, , , "The question of the rehabilitation of the men is receiving the consideration of the Government, because it realises that provision will have to be made for men returning from overseas," Mr Jones said. "We are considering proposals to deal with the men as they return from the point of view of employment or medical treatment. One of the difficulties of the past has been tor men to prove that their disability was due to war service. We think better provision should be made in connexion with this war, and we are going to provide that every soldier who comes back from overseas shall be medically exami .ed, even to the length of an X-ray, to make sure that he is fit when he is discharged from the forces. We will thus know his state of health when he returns. I think that a very wise provision to make." The Minister paid tribute to the work of the Discharged Soldiers Civil Re-establishment League. He explained the clauses of the two bills, and said that provision was made to bring up to the New Zealand rate any British pension awarded to New Zealanders sent Home to join the armed forces of Britain. This did not apply to men who had gone Home of their own accord to -join British units; but the position of these men was a matter that the Government could face. The Minister emphasised that there were no restrictions in respect of pensions on when a man married. It made no difference whether he married the day he left New Zealand or 20 years after his return. No provision was made, however, for children adopted by soldiers' wives after their husbands had gone overseas. "If home service personnel, or overseas personnel in training here, meet with any disability, if. must be proved due to war service.” Mr Jones said. Mr S. G. Holland (Opoosition. Christchurch North): Why do these men have to Drove disability due to war service when men overseas do not have to offer this proof? The Minister: It would be most difficult in some cases to prove that disability received overseas was due to war service. We assume responsibility for all disabilities while a man is overseas. I hardly think that would be fair. say. in the case of territorials, and that we should provide for them while at their normal work, or at snort. However, we have gone a long way toward bringing home service personnel, specially the territorials, within the provisions of the War Pensions _ Act. 'They are provided for while in camp or in training.