THE H.B. TRIBUNE. THURSDAY, DEC. 5, 1918. SOLDIERS’ PENSIONS AND ALLOWANCES.

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume VIII, Issue 312, 5 December 1918, Page 4

THE H.B. TRIBUNE. THURSDAY, DEC. 5, 1918. SOLDIERS’ PENSIONS AND ALLOWANCES.

WHY NOT RETROSPECTIVE ? There is little wonder that the executive officers of the Returned Soldiers’ Association are indignant at the reply which Cabinet, through the Prime Minister, has given to tne Association’s request that the improved scale of “pensions and allowances” applicable to married men and their dependants, which came into force at the beginning of this year, should be given retrospective application in favour of the earlier married volunteers and their wives, or widows, and children. Indeed, it seems strange that any pressure should require to be applied to the Government in order to induce it to concede this measure of bare justice to the men who spontaneously offered their services at the outset and during the earlier months and years of the war. Their case was very rationally and temperately urged in a. circular letter from the secretary of the Returned Soldiers’ Association sent not only to members of Cabinet,' but also to all the members of Parliament, at the opening of the current session. This circular opens with absolute truth by saying: ‘’The participation of New Zealand in the war and the necessity that a force should be dispatched without delay, made it necessary for the early volunteers to leave it entirely to those who remained behind to decide what should constitute a ‘square deal’ for the soldier. They took this course without apprehension, and were fortified in then- trust by declarations from Press and platform that their future would be assured by a. grateful country.” Of the soundness of this preliminary proposition, establishing the moral responsibility of the State and people, there can be no possible doubt. The circular then goes on to refer to the activities of the Second Division League—directed exclusively, and unhappily, to the interests aloue of its own members rendered liable to compulsory service—whereby the improved schedule of pensions and ailowanees was secured. These concessions, it is very reasonably argued in view of the poor grace with which they were granted, provide fair evidence that they were forced from the Government, by one influence and another, mainly political, in order to secure the necessary complement of reinforcements. "It is utterly inequitable,” continues the circular, “that the men who offered their services without first demanding the settlement of conditions of service should be worse treated than those who insisted”—and, in deed, it amounted to that—"on definite conditions before entering camp.” It then proceeds to quote the feeble reasons upon which the Government has hitherto declined to entertain such ill-supported rep resenentations as have been made on behalf of tne early volunteers. These may be summarised as follows: (a) That the finances of the Dominion would not stand the cost of the increase ; (b) that the administration would be a matter of too great difficulty for the Defence Department to cope with; (c) that the allowances were not really needed; (di that the early volunteers were not compelled to go and agreed to the conditions then offering; (e) that the real reason for the amended scale was the increase in the cost of living which ; had accrued since the early days oi the wai. To each of these objections the Association’s circular provides a logical answer, and, as the Prime Minister’s reply refers only to the ' first, it may be assumed that the others have been discreetly abandoned as untenable. But on the question of “cost” the Government stands obstinately firm, in oppo sition, we feel confidently sure, to the desire of the vast majority of the electors, and of the taxpayers on whom this relatively light addition to their burden would fall. The Prime Minister’s reply, after a courteous preface meaning nothing’ when its bare bones are. exposed, in effect curtly dismisses the subject thus: “Your representations have been placed before Cabinet, and 1 have now to advise that Cabinet, after very full consideration, regrets that in view of the huge expenditure which will be necessary in connection with the repatriation scheme which is now under consideration, it, is unable to accede to the request of vour association that these allowances should bo made retrospective.” Now, could Cabinet only see it, it is really in view of the "huge expenditures” of tne war in an infinitude of directions that the utter pettiness and meanness, apart from injustice of the financial argument assert themselves. And it has to be, remembered that these, "huge expenditures’* have not all been incurred for the direct prosecu tion of the war. We all know that concessions involving millions, such as those to civil -.prvants. have been made, and no doubt n; numbers of instances enjoyed by those who were not in the most urgent need of (hem. In scarcely any other case, has the Government persistent in its allegation of the inpossibility of financing a scheme, and, as we showin a note to lie published in this column to-day, the I'inance Minister. rhi=- very week, did not appear to_bt ’particular to a million or two what ■’mount might be involved in provid ing compensation to the “fat men” of the Liquor trade. So far as our observation has gone, the Government itself has not put forward any dous liability which compliance with ibis demand, now inferentally ad-

this demand now interentally admitted to be otherwise reasonable, would involve. The Returned Soldiers’ Association, however, puts it down at something about £400,000. Even assuming it to be substantially larger and to run to. the round half million, the amount is not, in these days, anything to “stagger the imagination.” As has already been argued here, the war has ceased many weeks, and some months, before' the most sanguine among us could have hoped six, aye even three, months ago. But no one suggests that we should have been unable to go on financing the war had it lasted another six months, as was anticipated. Yet to meet the just demands made for the married volunteers would not require more than a fortnight’s direct expenditure on the war, to say nothing of the saving of the country’s productive industrial energy resulting from its unexpectedly early termination. From no possible rational point of view is this Ministerial objection on the point of finance maintainable, and it will be an everlasting shame and reproach to the people of this country if they sit down indifferently and ungratefully to submit to any such poor excuse being advanced in their name. If agitation is necessary to secure this poor measure of justice to the men who sprang to our defence at the very first call, then let popular agitation be.commenced and maintained until it gathers such weight as to be irresistible. The Government has given way to persistent agitation for a referendum as to whether four millions and a half is to be paid to “the Trade” in order that the whole community ma.y be made compulsory sober. It would be easy to add to the ballot paper another issue as to whether another half million was to be. found in order to do bare justice to the men who have defended our liberties. In doing this there would be no need to abandon the “three-fifths majority,” for no one will doubt but that the answer would be practically unanimous.