MR O’BRIEN’S BILL

Grey River Argus, 11 September 1930, Page 5

MR O’BRIEN’S BILL

' INVALID PENSIONS All Parties Endorse It (Special to “Argus.”) WELLINGTON, September 10. The Invalid Pensions Bill ,which has ben introduced in Parliament by Mr Jas. O’Brien (Westland) was discussed in the House to-night. Mr O’Brien, speaking ou the measure. said that the late Sir Joseph Ward had advocated practically the same principle as was contained in this Bill. There were many men who were laid aside by illness and who felt that they would be better dead in order that their wives might receive some pension. When sickness came into a house, more money was needed, but the general experience was that the income then was reduced. Since the introduction of his Bill, said Mr O’Brien, he had received numerous letters in support of the proposal. It would be a wonderful thing if New Zealand could say that no sick or invalid person was in need. He pleaded with the Government to take the Bill up. Mr Samuel (Reform) warmly supported the Bill. He also expressed the hope that the Government would take it up. From his own experience, he knew of many cases of severe hardship caused as the result of the invalidity of husbands. The Leader of the Opposition, he said, had promised at the last general election that if he was returned to power, he would bring down a proposal on the lines of Mr O’Brien’s Bill. Mr Parry (Auckland Central) also commended the Bill, and upheld the right of people to receive a pension or superannuation on reaching a certain age. He urged the Minister of Pensions to consider the invalidity question .also to ascertain the number of people who would require to be assistled, and to bring down legislation next session. Air P. Fraser (Wellington Central) said that he thought that this was the first time that a proposal for invalidity pensions had taken the form of a Bill, and he congratulated the mover, the Alember for Westland. He did not know of one single Alember of the House who would not support this proposal put forward by Air O’Brien. He took it that Sir Joseph Ward had I spoken on behalf of his Party when he had advocated invalidity pensions, and he therefore felt sure that the Party members would endorse this I Bill. All of the Parties in the House had advocated invalidity pensions for years. The Government would be doing a human act, which would meet with general approbation, if it would prepare a scheme that would go through the House unanimously. i “Under the present conditions,” said the Alinister of Pensions, 4 ‘it will be impossible for some time. Much as one would like to do something on the lines proposed in this Bill involving a considerable sum of money.” He sakl that he had had an estimate made of the cost of Mr O’Brien’s proposals. It was calculated that in about three | vears if the pension was made ou the same level as the Old Age Pension, the amount would- bo about £400,000 a year. The pensions returns showed that the pensions payments for the 'past year had aggregated £2,809,598. j Air Fraser: —“The Best expenditure the country has.” I The Minister said that six different, [pensions proposals had been placed be- | fore the House by members this ses, sion, and the cost of four of the six I had been estimated at an additional [expenditure of £1,011,000. The Alinister said the question of the Aliners’ Phthisis Pensions was in rather an unfortunate position in that there was a difference of opinion between medical men as to whether I miners were actually suffering from I that disease. | Hon. Air Cobbe assured the House I that the Government entirely sympathised with what this Bill proposed, but he added that, at present, it was not possible to give effect to it. Something might be done when the financial position improved. Mr Al. J. Savage said that various Parties in the past had done little more than stand for the. principles in this Bill, and it was now time for action. The Hospital Boards were saddled with the responsibility at the present time, and this Bill would not involve any increased taxation, but would be making the taxation national instead of local. It should not be necessary -for a private Alember to sponsor this Bill, when they had a Party in power standing for the principle. Air Wright said that they were all ' agreed on tho merits of the Bill, which seemed to be carefully drawn, with ample safeguards. The claim for an invalid pension was as strong as any of the other pensions. It would be difficult to estimate the cost of the pension. One of the difficulties was the defining of an invalid. This was perhaps ths reason why the Bill had not yet been passed. He did not say that this difficulty was insuperable, but it was one that would have to be met. The Alinister of Pensions had given them clearly to understand that he was in favour of this Bill, but that the big obstacle was finance. Mr Chapman (Wellington North) said that some competent body should be set up to determine what cases fell in the category of invalids for the purpose of the invalid pension, and they should be given pensions, instead of being expected to depend on charitable aid. The Bill was read the second time, but it will not now proceed further.