WAR PENSIONS BILL

New Zealand Times, Volume XL, Issue 9092, 10 July 1915, Page 9

WAR PENSIONS BILL

"A NATIONAL MEASURE." The Hon. James Allen moved the second reading of the War Pensions Bill. He explained that it only applied to expeditionary forces ' after leaving Now Zealand. For those in camp in the Dominion prior to sailing the present law would be made operative. Regulations framed on existing legislation were ultra vires and an amendment of the Defence Act would be required to make the regulations in accordance with -law. The reason a dividing line had to be drawn was that otherwise ordinary training camps would have to be included and it had to bo recognised that the men attending the latter did so tinder compulsion. It would be necessary

for wives of disabled men and others to show that they were actually dependent on the soldiers before leaving Now Zealand- If a wife had a sufficient income of her own she would not bo assisted.

Tho Minister went on to refer to the schedule which has been published showing ' maximum rates in r egard to privates from 25s to £3 per week. He compared it with pensions allowed elsewhere to show that a fair scale had been drawn up, tho example of Australia being largely followed. In cases of children showing infirmity or mental incapacity the assistance could bo continued indefinitely beyond tho age oi IC. Though clause 11 provided that a pension should not be paid to a person not resident in New Zealand, there was a subsequent exception in favour' o) New Zee landers who enlisted in England and served with the New Zealand forces. Tho bill, Mr Allen stated, had emanated from a committee and seemed to make adequate provision for those who ©erred their country. POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION.

Sir Joseph War'd said that though tho bill had been before the Defence Committee the Minister was entitled to tho credit of it. It waa a national measure and waa as liberal as the country could afford. In any differences that had boon made in the grading as compared with Australia he thought the Government had noted wisely, in audition to tho Central Board of Control provided by the bill it was understood that.there should bo committees of inquiry in the four chief centres of tho Dominion. A matter worthy of consideration would be to make the pensions in connection with the South African war on the basis now proposed so that uniformity would be secured. Doubtless tho board in dealing with oases of partial disablement would err on the side of generosity. Though there was a limitation to seven children of a family in the hill, the rates per child were more liberal than in Australia.

Mr H. Poland (Ohinemuri) remarked that he was a strong supporter of the bill, but there were one or two points in regard to which he thought the measure was inadequate. It was quite true that the provision being made was more generous than that made in Great Britain, Canada, or Australia, but this did not necessarily mean that the provision being made was in all cases adequate. Ho compared the case of a widow of 25 years of age who would get £1 5s per week with that of a young man of the .same age totally incapacitated, who would receive the same sum. Surely such a man was in an infinitely worse position than the widow. In the British system this man would get twice the amount the widow would receive. The wife of a soldier totallv incapacitated received-only 12s 6d per week, Harsh as it may seem, it would be better for that woman that her husband had been killed. She would then receive 255, and would have no burden of an incapacitated husband to bear. He was also of the opinion that there was too great a difference between the rates allowed to officers and to men. He hoped the day would oome when the Dominion and every other country would recognise that every man who risked his life in warfare was entitled to the same consideration from the State. He further contended that Imperial reservists v r hq went from New Zea_ land at the beginning of the wax should receive the same pensions os were to be paid to New Zealanders. If they were in receipt of Imperial pensions the payments made to them should be sufficient to bring these pensions up to the New Zealand scale. PENSIONS NOT BIG ENOUGH.

Mr A. S. Malcolm (Clutha) thought that the Act might be liberalised with regard to the pensions to be paid to dependents, other than wives and children, in cases where the soldier killed had not been contributing to their support before he left. for the front.

1 Hon. D. Buddo (Kaiapoi) also expressed the opinion that the pensions provided for incapacitated men were, inadequate. Ho was sorry that Parliament, had been -asked to consider such a proposal. The bill did not meet his idea of what was reasonable, much less generous, and this was surely a time for generosity. Mr R. Fletcher (Wellington Central) also pleaded for a more generous allowance for men wholly incapacitated. The amount that was offered was not even a pittance. It would be a slur on the country (if better .provision were not made for the rank and file.

Mr B. A. Wright (Wellington Suburbs) considered that the measure on the whole was a good sound one. No doubt the Minister would listen to fair and reasonable suggestions in committee. He disagreed with the idea that there should be no provision in the bill for men who died while being trained in New Zealand.

Mr Allen: "There is provision for them in another Act." Mr Wright was glad to bear that. He failed to see why special consideration should not be given to inch who came back maimed and crippled and were engaged to be married. He would be prepared -to support any taxation necessary to offer the amplest compensation in such cases.

Mr A. E. Glorer (Auckland Central) expressed hie desire to support any humanitarian, legislation. The principle of this bill was undoubtedly sound, but it was not clear how mothers and fathers were to bo treated in a case where the soldier’s allotment had been transferred to some other person. Mr T. A. H. Field (Nelson) thought that some of the objections to the interpretation clause as to disablement carried a good deal of weight. The allowance of 25s should be raised to £2 per week. The House should certainly err on the side of generosity. Mr L. M. Isitt (Christchurch North) said that the House recognised that when a Minister brought down a bill such as this, and when the bill erred •it must necessarily err on the side of economy. Still, if the Minister could be shown that the opinion of the House and of the country was that the provisions should be more generous, the Minister should increase them. The pensions provided for by the bill should be much more liberal, even if it meant the permanent taxation of every person in the Dominion earning or receiving a salary. He thought also that a disabled Soldier, who was able to earn a few shillings, should be allowed to take at least the major portion of such earnings in addition to a full pension. Ho characterised as unjust the provision that a pension could not be paid to the mother of a boy enlisting in New Zealand if she lived in England or elsewhere outside of the Dominion. He thought at least that the Minister should enter into negotiations with the Home Government with a view to reciprocity in this matter. He recognised that the bill was a. huge advance on any other • measure previously adopted by the Dominion, or even on. any measure ever adopted in any country, but that should not suffice. This was a singularly wealthy country, and there should not 'be a single man in the Dominion who was unwilling to make cT sacrifice for years on behalf of those men who had suffered in our interests. (Hear, hear.) Mr A. Harris (Waitemata) advocated the increase of the allowance of 25s a week to a single man totally incapacitated. > This should be considerably increased. Mr T. A. H. Field: "Doubled.”

Mr Harris: "No, 1 won't say doubled, bnt I think the country could afford at least 5s a day, that is Sss a week." He went on to commend the provision of the bill providing for illegitimate children. He thought a reciprocal arrangement should be come to with Australia regarding the payment of pensions to people living cither in the Dominion ox the Commonwealth. Such an arrangement could extend to all. pensions payable by both countries.

Mr A. Walker (Dunedin North) characterised the scales of pensions provided

in the schedules as altogether insufficient. He was in favour of a. material increase. COUNTING THE COST. Mr G. W. Bussell (Avon) thought the Government was quite right in exercising: caution so that there would not be a danger of the pension fund breaking down on account of the demands made on it. The contingencies of the future could not easily be estimated, but he reckoned that it was not at all improbable that within the next two or three years New Zealand would be face to face with an annual expenditure for defence of nearly two millions per annum, representing XI 17s 6d per head of the population. The Government required to be on the safe side, but there was nothing to prevent an increase of the pensions if it were found practicable. He hoped that throughout the Dominion soldiers’ homes would be established for veterans, and that something would be done to start disabled men in some suitable occupations. What was proposed by the Government would, at any rate, save maimed soldiers and their dependents from dire poverty. Mr W. T. Jennings (Taumarunui) considered that the bill was unjust in not providing for the relief of parents in every case where a son was killed or wounded.. . Mr D. Buick (Palmerston) said the war was evidently going to be a very exhausting one, and the measure was cast on fair lines. Mr C. H. Poole (Auckland West) was favourably impressed by the bill, but the levelling up process must be carried out before it was entirely satisfactory. The appeals made by other members were quite in accord with his conviotlons*. Mr G. Witty (Riccarton) pointed out that many in the ranks had occupied a good position before joining, and there should not be too great a disparity in the allowances made. The patriotic i funds should not be too much relied upon. No matter what it cost, the people of the Dominion should be taxed according to their means. “IMPOTENCE OP PARLIAMENT.”

Mr J. McCombs (Lyttelton) said that the discussion bad shown the impotence of Parliament. Numerous members had suggested alterations but not one of them was able to propose an amendment to the bill in accordance with the rules of the House. It was time that the power was taken cut of the hands of Ministers only to propose alterations in financial matters. He went on to say that the provisions of the bill were not so generous as they ought to be. Mr W. A. Veitoh (Wanganui) said that he was much in accord with what the previous speaker bad eaid with regard to the powers of Ministers. It seemed to him that the Prime Minister governed the country. It occurred in this way. The Prime Minister governed the Cabinet; the Cabinet governed the party; the party governed Parliament, and Parliament governed the country. Thus the Prime Minister was virtually the un crowned king of the Dominion. Mr Massey; "But he Is generally found to be a benevolent despot." (Laughter.) Mr Voitch went on to commend the sentiments expressed by,Mr Poland. He was of the opinion that the provisions of the bill should be extended to the veterans* of the* Maori and South African wars. ' . , Dr H. T. •J. Thacker (Christchurch East) eaid that he cast no bouquets on the fathers and forefathers of the bill. He had hoped that now the portfolio of Finance had been conferred on the Minister for Labour (Mr Massey) the scale of pensions would have been based on the principle of helping the "lower man. ’ As the Minister who had framed the bill was a colonel he had evidently framed the bill on a military basis, but he himself would have liked to see it on a civil basis. ■ "FLAGS AND CROCODILE TEARS.;’ Mr P, C. Webb (Grey) said that the men who waved flags and shed crocodile tears when the boys were departing for the front were those who proposed that maimed men should have only 25s a week. This was not just. He hoped the tuna would soon come when there would be a Government in power to ’say that every boy who laid his life at the disposal of the Empire would be properly dealt by. He hoped that the outcome of the present debate would bo that no crippled soldier would have to depend on charity, and would have to be provided with an organ and monkey and get on the nerves of everybody in the street. Mr J. Anstey (Waitaki) expressed tbs opinion that the Hopse would hardly go so far as the hon. member for Ohinemnn had advocated in- his excellent speech. He thought that there should bo no limit on the number of the children pro vided for. It was the policy of the Dominion to increase the population. Therefore he thought the maximum should be wiped out. There would be very few cases where the number of children caused the maximum now fixed to be exceeded. Mr C. J. Talbot (Temuka) complimented the House on the fact that the bill had been discussed purely on its merits. He was sure that as the Government had heard the almost unanimous opinion of the House that the , lower-grade pensions should be increased, it would agree to such increases. Mr W. D. S. MacDonald (Bay of Plenty) said that there were hundreds of married men in his district alone who could not possibly offer their services to the Empire because they did not think that the Government would provide adequately for their wives and children if the worst happened to them. It was the duty of those who remained behind to make such provision for these men as would enable them to enrol at once. The Empire was faced with a most serious crisis, but if every man was needed from the Dominion the country would have to be shown that mote liberal provision could be made for incapacitated men. The allowance ought to be at least 30s per week. Mr J. A. Hanan (Invercargill) advocated £2 a week in the case of total disablement, apart altogether from children. Considering the comparative increase of prosperity in New Zealand something more might be done than was proposed. So far as the people generally was concerned no real sacrifice had yet been made. The people who were making the extra money should bear any additional taxation.

The debate was carried on by Mr McCalhim (Wainau), Dr It. McNab (Hawke's Bay), Mr .T. Payne (Grey Lynn), and Mr H. J. H. Okey (Taranaki). AN' ACTTTABIAL ESTIMATE.

Mr Allen, replying, stated* that he had got an actuarial estimate on an army of 50,000 with pensions double those allowed by the Imperial Government, allowing a 10 per cent, death rate and a 12 per cent, disablement rate. For one year the figures furnished, were: —Widows and children £31,000, permanent disablement .£190,000, temporary, disablement .£105,000, total £449,000. For two years the figures were —.£IBB,OOO, .£330,000. and £330,000 respectively; total £898,000, This calculation excluded commissioned officers. The motion for the seoondi reading was agreed to, and the House, at 12.10 a.m., adjourned until Tuesday.