WAR PENSIONS

New Zealand Times, Volume XL, Issue 9096, 15 July 1915, Page 11

WAR PENSIONS

To the Editor “N.Z. Times,” Sir,—The Minister and the Defence Committee are to be congratulated upon the bill, nevertheless it is urged that its passage be delayed till the broad outlines of the policy of New Zealand have been settled in the light of current events, The outstanding feature of the situation is that all the men New Zealand can spare must be got to England within the next six months. They will be found to amount to at least an extra 30,000, of whom nearly 25,000 will be married. The way of the married man must be made reasonably clear so that his duty to his dependants does not clash with his duty to his country. One of the chief means of doing so is to provide adequate pensions, and the other m adequate pay. The question of pay pannot be dealt with here. It is suggested thftt pepgiqßg |tta st D 9 pipyjaed for ft iiit.il immediately he letmi Bejs®. sot mere!* when he leaves New ZOSISItSI: Consideration will . show that. & . hmS should not be asked to risk the. ffittife of bis defendants.- aadLSP'. provisioS-a^

made for them under the Act of 1903. As to the rate, it is submitted that it is at present an undoubted bar to enlistment. The reader, if a married man, will. realise this when ho applies the fate to his own case. There is provided in the case of a private 25s a week for the wife and 5s a week for each child np to seven. The 5s a week is not enough, end no limit should exist as to the number of children. It will be a great nardship for dependants who now have good positions and ’prospects to be reduced to the bare living pension that is provided. It is suggested that where there is property it should not be counted up to, say, 20s a week, and where there is no'property, that up to, say, 20s a week more should he given according to the present prospects and position of dependants- This should _ apply to the cases both of death and disablement. Unless some such provision is made the fact is that those who do not go to the front will save themselves taxation at the expense of the dependants of the volunteer, which seems to be grossly unfair. In regard to' total, disablement, only 4s 6d a week- is allowed to a private for an' attendant, where one is required. Surely the- just thing is to .pay the reasonable cost from time to time of the .attendant. The. inaximum pension for the disabled private gives provision for only, five . children. It Is suggested all children should be provided for in all cases. Where a wife dies the soldier loses her pension, as well as her help. At least the amount of her pension should be retained for him to get help. In effect th© pension for dependants remains as in the case of the death of the soldier, and his personal pension in effect is: General 255. colonel 245, lieu-tenant-colonel 235, major 18s 6d, captain 15s, first lieutenant 12s 6d, second lieutenant 12s 6d. regimental sergeant-major 15s, company sergeant-major 14s 6d, sergeant 13s 6d, corporal 13s. private 13s 6d. in, the case of captain, first lieutenant, and second lieutenant, the ratj of pension for wife and children is higher than for the n-c.o.’s and men, -but nevertheless it is submitted that it is quite unjust.to them to leave the captain at the highest n. 0.0. rate and the lieutenants at the rate of a privateThe provision for the wife and children |s, it is submitted, inadequate, 'how much more so when to thi# family is added a totally disabled man and the income is increased by only 12s 6d a week?—l am, etc., S. A. ATKINSONKelburn, July 13th, ■