War Pensions Reviews

Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30591, 6 November 1964, Page 3

War Pensions Reviews

fParliamentary Reporter) WELLINGTON, November 5, The dissatisfaction of Opposition members at pensions allotted to former servicemen and their dependants was expressed in committee discussion this evening on the War Pensions Amendment Bill. Mr W. A. Fox (Opp., Miramar) said that the Opposition considered the basic ’pension should be £5 10s a | week, instead of £5 ss, and that there should be a regular review system of pen- ! sions. Reviews should be not more than 12 months apart.

On pensions to widows of servicemen, he said that any anomalies should be removed at once. This could be done with a minimum of trouble and expense. At present, widows of servicemen received £3 17s 6d, but widows of colonels received £3 18s and widows of brigadiers £4. The principle of this dif-

ferentiation was all wrong, Mr Fox said, and this had been admitted by the Government. Why could it not be adjusted now?

Mr D. S. Thomson (Govt., Stratford) said that the finest thing done for war pensions in many years was the guarantee given to the Returned Services’ Association by th Minister of Defence that war pensions would be reviewed regularly. This was a promise that the Labour Government had never seen fit to make.

Mr A. J. Faulkner (Opp., Roskill) said that the promise had been that the reviews would be no more than two years apart. He thought that the R.S.A. would not mind if the intervals were made even shorter—say three months.

The Minister in Charge of War Pensions (Mr Kinsella) said he was heartened by the new-found interest of the Opposition in ex-servicemen’s affairs.

During the last term of the Labour Government the purchasing power of the basic war pension was 6s lower than what it was today. The R.S.A. had persistently represented at that time that it wanted an agreement such as the National Government had made for a two-yearly review. The association had been turned down flat by the Labour Government.

There were defects in the war pensions legislation, he said, but he had hopes that a solution would be found. Mr Kinsella reviewed the effects of the basic pension and the war veterans’ allowance. “I believe any Government must act fairly and honestly by war pensioners, but I also believe we must take care to see that the basic war pension and economic pension remain the basic war pensions,” he said.

Mr H. G. R. Mason (Opp., New Lynn) protested that the first Labour Government was early among all Governments to introduce a rehabilitation scheme and its pensions were generous by comparison with those anywhere. It was wrong to suggest the Labour Party had a new-found interest in war pensioners.

Mr Kinsella said pensions would be reviewed after April

He said anomalies concerning payment of 2s 6d more to war widows of officers above a certain rank would be reviewed at the same time.