The Evening Star FRIDAY, JULY 8, 1910.

Evening Star, Issue 14413, 8 July 1910, Page 4

The Evening Star FRIDAY, JULY 8, 1910.

|t is unfortunate that the Old Age Pensions

Amendment Act of Old Age Pensions. last year, while improving the position of a large number of pensioners, lias (apparently owing to an oversight) had the effect of injuriously prejudicing the lot of many others. The main object of the Act was to increase (from £l5O to £340) the maximum value of the home which a pensioner might possess without' impairing tho claim to the full amount of pension. The Bill oame before Parliament when Die session was drawing to a close, but it is a mistake to suppose that it was rushed through the House without discussion, though the principal stages were all taken at one sitting. Mr T. E. Taylor, who is not in the habit of offering unnecessary praise to the Government, observed in reference to the chief provision of the Bill: In the present state of the finances of the country, I think it is a courageous act on the • part of the Government to make a proposal of this kind in purely humanitarian interests. I am the more

pleased that this is being done this year, when heavy demands are being made on Parliament for defence purposes, and I would not have been surprised if tho request had been refused.

Rut, apart from the value of the home, a pensioner had previously been allowed to possess accumulated savings up to £SO, without being subjected to the reduction of £1 in the amount' of the pension for every £lO of property, this being the rate of reduction applicable to larger accumulations. Ry some means- 1 -accidental, no doubt, but none tho less regrettable—the provision for this proper exemption was omitted from the amending Bill, with the result that some 900 pensioners have received a smaller sum during the last six months than (it is safe to say) Parliament intended them to receive. These deductions have- totalled £2,846 —a trifling average from one point* of view, no doubt, but tho matter baa to bo regarded from the point of view of extreme poverty. It lias been said that Mr Janies Allen directed the attention of the Government to tho omission when the Bill was before the House, but this statement does not appear to be borne out by the ‘ Hansard’ record. It is true that Mr Allen offered a number of criticisms on other points, and was satisfactorily answered by Sir Joseph Ward; but we do not gather that ho detected the omission of the £SO exemption. Had ho done so, the mistake would probably have been rectified on the spot. Yesterday the Prime Minister promised a deputation (comprising a large majority of the House) that he would submit amending legislation to restore the exemption, and there is no reason why the Bill should not be on tho Statute Book in time lor the payment of the August pensions.