WAR PENSIONS

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXI, Issue 21868, 2 August 1934, Page 11

WAR PENSIONS

MEN IN FAILING HEALTH ELIGIBILITY REQUESTED SYMPATHY OF THE HOUSE [BY TELEGRAPH —PRESS ASSOCIATION] WELLINGTON. Wednesday Leave to introduce his War Pensions Amendment Bill was sought by Mr. J. A. Lee (Labour —Grey Lynn) in the House of Representatives to-day. The bill provides for a pension for any invalid soldier provided that such soldier consents to avail himself of tho treatment prescribed and supplied by the Pensions Department, and provided that such disability is not aggravated by wilful neglect of such treatment. Mr. Lee said every returned soldier was behind the proposals of his bill. New Zealand returned soldiers were breaking up, but because they were not recorded as casualties they were not entitled to the treatment accorded to other returned men. No soldier who was on active service came back with his health unimpaired. Big inroads were made into the constitutions of men even although they were not scratched. The bill would provide pensions to men who were now cracking up, but who were not able to secure pensions through the War Pensions Board. Duty of the Country Mr. W. J. Jordan (Labour —Manuka u) supported the bill. He thought it was the duty of the country to provide for those men who went overseas to fight for the country and who were now feeling the effect of their experiences. He trusted the Government would say it was not necessary for a private member to introduce such a bill. He was sure every taxpayer .would support the Government giving extra assistance to those men.

Mr. H. G,. Dickie (Government — Patea) referred to what had been done in other parts of the Empire for pre-maturely-aged returned soldiers. He recognised that New Zealand had many men worthy of assistance, but said the Pensions Board had recently adopted a more liberal viewpoint. Mr. E. T. Tirikatene (Independent— Southern Maori) asked that Maoris be treated equally with Europeans. Mr. A. M. Samuel (Independent— Thames) said the experiences of the men must have had a detrimental effect on their health.

Mijfl. E. R. McCombs (Labour —Lyttelton) asked the Government to honour the promises given when the men went away.

Mr. J. Hargest (Government —Invercargill) said he felt and he was certain that every other member of the House felt that they owed more than they could afford to pay to those men who went away. He thought something more should be done for them. Recent Increase in Cost The Hon. J. G. Cobbe, Minister in charge of Pensions, said he had to agree with much that had been said. Nevertheless he thought that every reasonable consideration was given to a returned man who could put up a good case. The department's aim was not to prevent any man receiving a pension provided there was a reasonable probability that his ill-health was due to war service. In proof of that, the "War Pensions Bill was increased by £29,000 during last .year. He had been going into the matter of the provision for the dependants of men who had married two years after the war. While he did not want to commit himself then, he thought the alteration could possibly be made. Two years was too short and it was possible that it would be altered to five years. The Minister admitted that many men who came back in good health were now cracking up and that was due to war serrice. The bill was read a first time. CORPORAL PUNISHMENT APPLICATION IN SCHOOLS A WANING PRACTICE [BY TELEGRAPH —PRESS ASSOCIATION] WELLINGTON, Wednesday A question regarding corporal punishment in schools was asked by Mr. A. S. Richards (Labour —Roskill) in the House of Representatives to-day. Mr. Richards asked whether, in view of a disclosure in the annual report of the inspectors of the Otago Education Board to the effect that not all teachers kept a record of corporal punishments as required by the regulations, the Minister of Education would cause a memorandum to bo sent to all teachers emphasising the provisions of the law, and stating tho determination of tho department to havo its by-laws loyally obeyed. Tho Prime Minister, Mr. Forbes, replied that the annual report of tht\ Otago inspectors did not contain anything in the nature of a disclosure in regard to corporal punishment. Tho inspectors said tliey regretted that not all teachers kopt records of corporal punishment as advised by the board in 1932, and they had evidence that corporal punishment had in certain cases been used as a teaching method. There were no regulations dealing with recording corporal punishment, and tho majority of boards did not require that such a record bo kept. All boards, however, had by-laws which dealt very definitely with the infliction of corporal punishment. Recently the Education Department had been in communication with senior inspectors in regard to corporal punishment, and it found that the practice was progressively waning throughout tho Dominion.