WAR PENSIONS

Evening Post, Volume XC, Issue 88, 12 October 1915, Page 3

WAR PENSIONS

ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS WIDENING THE SCHEME A LABOUR CRITICISM. The new provisions relating to war pensions were explained in the House of Representatives last night by the Hon. James Allen (Minister of Defence) in moving the Defence Act Amendment Bill. Mr. Allen said that the measure was brought down in accordance with a promise he had made to the House. It made provision for the payment of pensions in the case of men training in camps in the Dominion. It contained a hint to the Pensions Board that men going outside the Dominion were entitled to higher pensions than those who did not leave our shores, though it recognised the full right of the latter to the pension. The Bill also contained official recognition of the National Reserve. The Bill was read a second time. In Committee, general discussion followed, in which criticism was levelled against Sub-clause 2 of Clause 2 on the ground that soldiers who were injured in camp at Trentham, or contracted illness, were deserving of the same pension as those who were disabled at Gal- ' lipoli. Mr. J. A. Young submitted that in the case of a man whose wife or relatives lived in England and he enlisted here, his dependents should be provided for in the event of his being killed, iiTespective of the fact that they lived abroad. " j In replying, the Minister (Hon. James ! Allen) said that the sub-clause objected to was inserted with a view to giving I the Pensions Board power to deal with each case on its merits. When the circumstances warranted it a pension would be granted. There were some cases, however, in which disablement might be caused through injudicious , conduct of the man himself, and the board would have to use its discretionary powers to see that it did not lay itself open to very many such claims. It was a safety clause, and he urged the members to agree to it. In regard to men who enlisted in New Zealand, but whose dependents lived elsewhere, it was being sought to establish a reciprocity arrangement with other countries, and New Zealand had already agreed to pay a pension to a widow of an Australian Officer who was killed and who resided in New Zealand. In the meantime, Cabinet was considering all such claims on their merits. As regards the National Reserve, a conference was shortly to be held with the heads of the organisation, and regulations would be framed later. In Committee, Sub-clause 2 was amended to read "the War Pensions Board may take into consideration the fact that the death or disablement of the member occurred in New Zealand" instead of "the board 'shall' take, etc." With this amendment and a machinery amendment, the Bill was put through its remaining stages and passed. DEBATE IN THE COUNCIL AUTHORITIES CRITICISED. Speaking to the second reading of the Defence Amendment Bill in the Legislative Council, the Hon. J. Barr expressed the opinion that, while public opinion had" been of a progressive nature in the matter of pensions, the Minister of Defence had been forced to take action which he ought to have taken on his own account. Committees everywhere were giving their time and trouble on behalf of the soldiers, and always they had met with a mental attitude on the part of the Defence authorities which demonstrated that they did not appreciate what the people desired. Take the unfortunate and regrettable mistake of centralisation. Sir Francis Bell : No mistake ! Mr. Barr complanied that while New Zealand is a democratic country, a great mistake had been made in creating such forces as "Lord Liverpool's Own." It was farcical, and tended to create a bad feeling between reinforcement and reinforcement. Those at the head of affairs had not risen to the occasion. As in the past, the public would insist on men of business capacity running the affairs of the Dominion in a businesslike way. Who was consulted, he asked, about " Lord Liverpool's Own "? Sir Francis Bell : Rather late ! Mr. Barr contended that there had been no opportunity to deal with the matter. There had been a mere muddling ! along, and no show of statesmanship whatever. The man at the head of affairs had shown himself incapable of rising to the occasion. The Hon. W. D. H. Baillie expressed the opinion that the Minister of Defence and those associated with him had done their best in an emergency. When he was at Home, at the time of the Orimean War there was a certain aniount of muddle, but it was not entirely the fault of the Minister or his staff. In New Zealand all concerned had done their best under conditions that demanded urgency. Sir William Hall-Jones said he entirely differed from Mr. Barr. For his own part he entirely appreciated all that the Minister of Defence had done. When the war broke out the camp was formed in a hurry, and the result was that on Saturday they were told that some 37,000 men had left New Zealand Jor the defence of the Empire. No camp had ever beei foimed without some trouble being connected with it, but he belie /ed that if the Minister had had full time for consideration he would have put the camp at Trentham, where it is to-day. The Minister of Defence had done work which was greatly to be appreciated, and nn could not be made responsible for everything. If the Hon Mr. Barr had seen anything in regard to the camps that needed improvement it was nis duty to have brought it under the notice of the authorities. As to the reference to " Lord Liverpool's Own," what did the title of a regiment matter, so long as the men all fought for the same cause 7 (Hear, hear.) In the course of the debate that ensued, the Hon. R. Moore said he believed the Hon. J. 'Barr would eventually regret the tirade of abuse he had levelled against the Minister of Defence, who had done his best (and a very good best) under very trying circumstances, and whose son had fallen in defence of the Empire. Mistakes had been made everywhere, but he thought we had been j particularly fortunate in having such a man as the Minister of Defence to grasp the situation. If the Hon. J. Barr knew so much about ib, why did he not make suggestions earlier in the war and during the session? But no! He waited until the closing hours of the session and then stuck his stiletto into the Minister when it was too late for him to reply. Replying to a somewhat protracted debate, iair Francis Bell said he would not endeavour at that stage of the session to discuss the administration of the Defence Department, nor did he think it was advisable to say anything about the nature of the criticism that had been directed against that administration. But in regard to Mr. Allen he said he was proud to have been associated with him ; he had devoted himself day and night to the service of the country ; he had had grave and tremendous responsibilities; he had never resented criticism ; and the eighteen hours a day he worked had always been found to be too short. The

Army Council and the Imperial authorities had spoken in terms of high praise of the excellent work of the Department of which he was head. The second reading was agrecl to on the voices and the Bill was suL^o-iuently put through Committee and final stages.