WAR PENSIONS BILL.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LII, Issue 15975, 21 July 1915, Page 9

WAR PENSIONS BILL.

AN AMENDED SCHEME. INCREASES IN RATES. LOWER RANKS BENEFIT. LENGTHY DISCUSSION IN" HOUSE. [BY TELKCRWH.—SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT.] Wellington. Tuesday. The amendments proposed in the War Pensions Bill by the Secret Defence Committee were reported to the House of Representatives to-day by the Prime Minister, as chairman of the committee. The effect of the amendments is to increase the amounts in the second schedule, payable to dibbled soldiers in the lower ranks. The maximum rate for a- private is increased from £1 5s to £1 15s per week, but the same maximum is also fixed for all non-commissioned ranks. The maximum rate for a lieutenant is increased from £1 15s to £1 17s 6d. The maximum aggregate rates of pension have also been increased. Tile following are the new maximum rates, the former rates being in parentheses:— Private, (£3) £3 12s 6d ; corporal. (£3 3«) £3 13s; sergeant, (£3 6s) £3 13s 6d ; company sergeant-major. (£3 8?) £3 14s 6d ; regimental sergeant-major, (£3 9s) £3 15s; lieutenant. (£3 16s) £4; captain, (£4 3s) £4 ss; major, (£4 12s) £4 15s 6d ; heutena.nt-coWl, (£5 3s) £5 9a ; colonel, (£5 ss) £5 12s; brigadier-general or major-general, (£5 9s) £5 15s. No alteration has been made in the first schedule, which provides the rates of pensions to the widows and children of deceased soldiers. The provision in the original Bill for an increase in the rates payable to disabled soldiers when the services of an attendant are necessary has been deleted by the committee. Men Reported Missing. The committee proposes that the allowing new clause shall be added to the Bill in order to make special provision for the. case of members of forces, officially reported as " missing ": — "1. Pens : ons under this Act shall be! payable to the dependents of a member of i the forces who is officially reported to the Minister as missing, in the same manner! as if the member had died of wounds or I injuries received in his employment as such ! member on the date on which he was so i reported. ''2. In the event of the member being' subsequently reported as living and die'-! abled, pensions granted under this section shall he withdrawn, and pensions in respect of disablement granted in lieu there-1 of. "3. In the event of the member being subsequently reported as living, and not : disabled, all pensions granted under this section shall be withdrawn, and the amounts theretofore paid by way of pen-1 sions to the dependents may. in the dis- ; cretion of the board, be deducted from the accumulated nay of the member. j "5. The provisions of section 18— authorising the payment of allotments of pay after the date of the death of a member of the forces—shall mutatis mutand s extend so as to authorise the payment of allotments after the date on which a! member is reported missing, and all pav- i ments heretofore mad,? bv war of allotmerit of pay in respect of such members i are hereby validated." Several members unzed that the pensions proposed were not high enough. |

Questions of Finance. The Minister for Defence said the alterations made in the schedules would entail a considerable sum of monev. Thev were calculating on a 12 per rent, casualty basis and it was anticipated that New Zealand would send 50,000 men to the front. The alterations made would theref°™ mea " anything from £200.000 to £150,000 per year and in two years we might have to face £1,000,000 for peni.ns alone. What was the use of their nutting an hysterical measure on the Statute Book that would not stand the test of time ? Suppose, at some future time it was found they could not keep up the payments, were they going to repudiate them ? The Canadian pension for a married man was £79 per annum, and for the unmarried man £52 per annum He had also obtained information regarding English and Australian pensions, and he still maintained that New Zealand led the way in the matter of generosity In New Zealand a totally disabled man and his wife would receive £123 10s per annum, against £62 in England.

Mr. Wright contended that as the Secret Defence Committee was representative of all parties in the House, some deference must be paid to the conclusions at whicli it had arrived. The measure of the most Liberal Government in Australasia was not nearly so generous as that, of a so-called Tory Government in New Zealand.

Mr. Myers said the desire on the part of certain members to increase the pensions did credit to their hearts, but they did not fully take into consideration the financial side of the question. The whole matter resolved itself into a question of financial obligation. Mr. Walker contended that the maximum average for a family of five would not supply a living wage. Mr. Vigor Brown contended that it did not matter if the pensions cost £2.000,000. If the money had to be raised, the wealthy brewers, wealthy lawyers, and wealthy land-owners should be taxed to provide the funds. Mr. Parr said the increases proposed were as far as it was safe to go. They had already provided £12,000.000 for the war, and they would be lucky if they got out of it with less than £20,000.000 bemadded to the national debt. a Sir J. Ward Defends Bill. Sir Joseph Ward said the purpose for which the Secret Defence Committee was set up was to ascertain how far the burdens of taxation could be imposed upon the people to provide pensions for soldiers. Men from both sides were on that committee, and if those men could not be trusted the House had better say so. Thev would retire and let others go on that committee. Never in the history of Parliament had any such scheme been settled on the floor of the House. Such schemes had always been referred to committees, and it was useless for members to stand up and say, put the burden on to beer .or put it on to something else. All these matters had to be carefully considered. He yielded to no one in his desire to help the men who had fought for the country. and if lie could give £3 per week to a wounded man he would do it, but it could not he done. It still remained to the credit of the Government that its scheme was still the most liberal ever put before any Parliament. The House had a right to consider the Minis- , ter for Finance in a matter such as this. He had to find the money. The Bill, as originally brought down- involved an expenditure of £900.000 per annum, and now increases had been proposed, running into some £250.000 per annum. He was not a pessimist, but he was convinced that when the war was over the purchasing powc of England and the Continent was aoiug to be very seriously affected for some years to come. They had not only to think of to-day but of years to come. It was unfair for some members to pose as greater friends of the soldiers than members of the committee. He was not prepared to sit quietly and hear that sort of thing going oi\ without a protest. After the secret committee had given the matter i such careful consideration to the Bill it ! was next door to an insult to ask that the Bill he referred back to it.

The discussion was proceeding when the telegraph office closed.