Increased Pensions

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XXVI, Issue 223, 3 September 1936, Page 9

Increased Pensions

BILL DEBATED House Passes the Second Reading CERTAIN AMENDMENTS By Telegraph—Pres* Association WELLINGTON, Sept. 2. The seeond-reading debate on the Pendone Amendment Bill was resumed in the House of Representatives to-day by Mr K. L. Holyoake (Nat., Motueka) who said they had been informed that the Government intended to spend on pensions this year £5,480,000 as compared with the £3,370,000 spent last year He wks in full aeeord with a national health-insurance scheme, and he was sorry that such a scheme was not being considered at the present juncture. There was not a member of the House who did not desire tn soe pensions on the highest level, but they had a duty to see that taxation -as regulated so that industry in future would not be hampered to such an extent that it would not be able to pay taxes. They Shonld not allow their hearts to run away with their heads. He thought that' the invalidity pension was a most admirable provision, but he thought it should not apply only to permanently incapacitated people but to those who perhaps were totally incapacitated for only a short period. The Hon. W. E. Parry: That belongs to something else, not this. Mr Holyoake thought that the provision for deserted wives was a good thing, but he thought it might be open to abuse. Care could be taken to see that the taxpayers were not imposed Upon.

NATIONAL SUPERANNUATION. Mr J. O’Brien (Govt., Westland), laid there was plenty of room for improvement in the Bill, but when they did improve it they wanted to institute a national superannuation scheme which would do away with pensions altogether. He praised the increase in pensions, particularly those referring to miners. For years he said he had endeavoured to have the Invalidity Pensions Bill put on the Statute Book, and although members of the then Government had expressed sympathy and realised the desirability of such a measure they had Mid that the eost to the country would be too great He ventured to say that if the last Government had still been in office nothing would have been done, bnt the present Government was able to find more than £2,000,000 more for pensions. Mr H. G. Dickie (Nat., Patea) asked Why the Government had deviated from the Budget proposal of a £1 a week level for an extra half-crown, and suggested that it was because of the rising eost of living. Referring to deserted wives’ pensions, he said there was such • thing as collusion between husband and wife and said that the passport system to Australia should be very strictly administered so that, before a husband eould leave the country, he should receive bis wife’s consent He objected to the clause which allowed criminals to qualify for a pension while people of Unsober habits or immoral character were debarred. It placed a premium on •rime. •WHO DESERTED WHOM! Mr F. Schramm (Govt, Auckland East) said that the provision for deserted wives might give rise to many complex problems, sueh as whether a husband had deserted his wife or the wife had deserted her husband. He hoped that before the Bill was passed the clause would be tightened up and loop holes removed. He paid a tribute to Mr O'Brien, who had repeatedly urged the claim of invalids for pensions. Mr O’Brien had done more than anybody else to bring the position of invalids before the House and the country. Noone, he claimed, could object to taxa-

tion to do something for those who '•ould not help themselves. One of the worst features of the present pensions law was that people had to pauperise themselves before they received a pension.

The Hon. J. G. Cobbe (Nat, Onia) expressed pleasure that the Minister had not attempted to make any cheap capital out of the fact that he (Mr Cobbe). when Minister of Pensions, was unable, owing to shortage of money, to do more regarding pensions. He had given a promise that when the money was available something would be done to provide pensions for invalids. He thought that the Pension Estimates would have to be increased considerably and that before long it would be found that the eost of pensions would amount to £6,000,000 and that afterwards, because there was a tendency for the number of pensions to increase with the in crease in population, the figure would reach £7,000,000. PROVISION FOR MAORIS. Mr E. L. Cullen (Govt, Hawke’s, Bay), expressed pleasure that Maoris living under the same conditions as Europeans were to come within the scope of the Bill. He also thought that the Maori who drew a snail income from land should be considered so that he should be able to live under decent conditions. Mr T. D. Burnett (Nat., Temuka) looked forward to the time when widows would be given a pension irrespective of the number of children or of the children’s ages. The Bill would relieve hospital boards to a considerable extent. The Hon. F. Langstone thought the Bill reflected tremendous credit on Mr Parry. He said that the sense of security that would be given those affected by the Bill was of more value than the actual money they would receive. He said that when people saw the affect of that humanitarian legislation, when they saw the impetus it would give to business, they would say that 4t should have been in operation long ago. Mr C. H. Chapman (Govt., Wellington North) said that undoubtedly the time had arrived when provision should be made for deserted wives, and the provision in the Bill was admirable. It would mean that those women would be able to live more comiortably than in the past.

BILL MEANS MORE TAXES. Mr W. A. Bodkin (Nat., Otago Cen trail said that the circumstances justified the last Government in reducing pensions. He said that despite the Government’s pre-election talk of money reform all pension increases were to be provided in the same way as past Governments had made improvements—that was, by taxation. The Bill would place an extra burden upon industry and woula discourage investment of capital in industry, and that would not help to solve the unemployment problem. He thought that the sooner a universal pension system where everybody was compelled to contribute was introduced the better it would be. Mr W. T. Anderton (Govt.. Eden) said it was impossible for the Opposition to excuse itself for the reduction in pensions. The Opposition was liberal in the wrong direction, it gave £‘3,000,000 in income-tax to those who could afford to nay, while it reduced old-age, soldiers and other pensions. He believed that the Bill would bring into existence in the Dominion a condition of security- that had not been known for many years. The debate was interrupted to enable a number of amendments to be made to the Bill. Mr Parry explained that the Bill did not express ju=t what the Government had in its mind and that amendments were to be introduced to make the position absolutely clear. AMENDMENTS TO BILL.

It was found, respecting the £5OO exemption for moneys in the Post Oiiice Savings Bank, that the powers in the Bill could be used in a way that was not intended by the Government, and an amendment would cover that. A second amendment was to make it clear that the Bill would apply to the widow of a miner whose death had occurred before the Act came into operation.

Another amendment dealt with the question of compensation received by a person who had met with an accident —as to whether he would have the right to the maximum £5OO so that the money could be used to pay off

any mortgage on the home m which, he was living. The amendment would permit that. , The last amendment was to deal with a sad kind of case where, under the old Act, a person who waa not sufficiently capable of knowing what she was signing in the rorm of a document, although reasonable enough to be at large, could not receive a pension. The amendment made provision that such a person could receive a pension. , Mr Parry, in reply to the debate, thanked members for the favourable reception they had given the Bill. He asked members to assist him in putting the Bill through so that the work could oe put into operation this month. The department would give every assistance and advice to those who had to fill in forms in connection with applications for pensions. He was going to ask institutions not to claim back pay to July 1, but to allow pensioners to reap the benefit of that back pay. He paid a tribute to the staff- of the Pensions Department and to his private secretary for the assistance they had given him in preparing the Bill. The second reading was carried.

WAR PENSIONS. The Hon. F. Jones moved' the second reading of the War Pensions Amendment Bill. He said that the Bill would restore pensions to their former level and increase the economic pension to 25/-. The cost to the Government this year would be £65,000 for nine months, but next year it would be £86,000. He referred to the increasing costs of war pensions and allowances to war pensioners., and said that the cost of pensions this year would be £1,584,000 and that in addition £70,995 would be spent in medical treatment. Mr Jones paid a tribute to the work of the War Pensions Board. He said that the cost of the increase in the economic pension was £33,000. new pension for wives and widows £19,000; increase to other dependents £6000; war veterans’ allowance, extension of marriage period, £7000; total £65,000. Mr Dickie approved the Bill and made a plea for those who could not attribute their disability to war service. The Bill was read the second time. Mr Parry moved the second reading of e Family Allowance Amendment Bi. . the clauses of which he explained. The second reading was carried. The House went into committee to consider these three Bills. The short title of the Pensions Amendment Bill was still under discussion when progress was reported. The House rose at 10.30.