INVALID PENSIONS

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXI, Issue 21845, 6 July 1934, Page 13

INVALID PENSIONS

LABOUR SUPPORT GIVEN REPLY BY THE MINISTER CONSIDERING THE TAXPAYER [BY TELEGRAPH—PRESS ASSOCIATION] WELLINGTON, Thursday In moving for leave to introduce tlie Invalids Pension Bill in the House of Representatives to-day, Mr. J. O'Brien (Labour —Westland) said that for years every party had made promises of introducing invalid pensions, hut nothing had been done. It had been said that the cost was too great, hut he believed that at present the House was almost unanimously in favour of such legislation being passed. The cost to the country would be practically nothing when the savings were taken into consideration. The cost of charitable aid could almost be wiped out. The bill provided for a pension of £1 a week for adult invalids and 10s for children, Mr. W. 15. Parry (Labour —Auckland Central) said the bill was one which New Zealand really required and one that could be passed without causing any serious difficulty to the finances of the country. Former Promises Recalled Mr. A. M. Samuel (Independent— Thames) supported the bill. He said the promises made by more than one prospective Government had not been honoured after achieving power. Mrs. 15. 11. McCombs (Labour —Lvttelton) said she hoped the Government would take the measure up. New Zealand had gone a long way in adopting socialistic legislation, and she hoped that in future Governments would be on the Treasury benches that would go much further in giving relief to persons in necessitous circumstances.

Mr. R. Semple (Labour —Wellington East) said there was a moral responsibility resting on the Government to take the measure up. If the country was on the road to recovery, the first to receive benefit should be those who were unable to protect themselves. The Rev. C. L. Carr (Labour — Timaru) said other pensions were instituted because people were unable to support themselves. That inability to earn applied also to invalids. Mr. H. At more (Independent—Nelson), who said he favoured the bill, said the appeals made might touch the heartstrings of the Minister, but would not touch the pursestrings of the Government. Mr. A. J. Stallworthy (Independent —Eden) said that all that was required was an adjustment of the system dealing with invalids, as their needs to-day in most cases were administered by charitable aid societies and hospital boards. A Common-sense Policy Mr. F. Langstone (Labour —Waimarino) said that apart from humanitarian principles, it was a commonsense policy to make provision for those who were unable to fend for themselves through no fault of their own. The Hon. J. G. Cobbe, Minister of Pensions, said he had no record of any promise being made about pensions. Every, member of the House recognised the crying need for something being done, but he said that pensions payments last year amounted to £IIB,OOO more than the year before, and were still increasing. The taxpayer had to be considered.

There were two things he would like to do. One was to restore the cut in old-age pensions, and the other was the granting of invalid pensions. If things continued to improve, he thought there was a possibility of recommendations in those directions being made, although he did not want that to be taken as a definite promise. The bill was read a first time. LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ADDRESS-IN-REPLY DEBATE [BY TELEGRAPH —PRESS ASSOCIATION] WELLINGTON, Thursday The Address-in-Replv debate was continued in the Legislative Council today. The Hon. C. J. Carrington (Auckland) said it was wrong to minimise the effects of Communism, which were detrimental to the traditions of British civilisation. In order to combat Communism they should remove some of the evils of capitalism. The Hon. ,J. Trevethick (Auckland) said that New Zealand should do everything in her power to further her relationship with Britain. If conditions improved in England they would be reflected in the Dominion. He did not think England would impose restrictions on Dominion imports, as such a course would prevent the Dominions from spending as much as they could in the Home market. The debate was adjourned.