EXPEDITIONARY FORCE.

Colonist, Volume LVIII, Issue 14539, 17 October 1917, Page 7

EXPEDITIONARY FORCE.

NEW ALLOWANCES

INCREASES TOTAL £599.000

SECRET QUOTA OF REDUCED

REINFORCEMEN1 LS

(From Our Parliamentary Correspondent.)

Wellington. Oct. IG. The Minister oi: Defence tabled in the House of Ilcpreseniatives to-tlaj' regulations governing separation allowances to .'wives and other dependents of mem-

bers" of the Expeditionary Force,'_ tr> operate from January Ist. They are a« follows, per diem: —

First and second lieutenants drawing pay of rank: Wife or guardian-of motherless children, 3s. - . Warrant' officers, non-commissioned officers, and men: "Wife, 3s ; widowed mother dependent on soldier or invalid father who is a widower and dependent on soldier, if total income apart from allotment does not exceed l()s weekly, Is 6d ; child under 16 years,-Is; brothers and sisters under 16' dependent on soldier, Is. The Minister, in explaining the difference between this and the old scale, stated that no provision was formerly made for separation allowance in respect of the wife or children of an officer, as the pay was supposed to be sufficient, but,' owing to the increase in the new- scale, a warrant officer with one child, was broughtirup to a~ better I-osition in regard to pay and allowances than a:, lieutenant .with one child.. The increase to the wife- of a warrant officer and soldier was from 7s tc 21s per week..- The present payment to a widowed mother was 7s Gd weekly if her income did not 'exceed 7s. It was proposed' to make an increase to 10s 6d and allow 10s income. That would allow the receipt of the old-age pension of £'26 per annum. Mr Poole: That' has been raised to 15s per week. Sir James Allen: lam aware of that, but we cannot come, up to that. The Minister went on to say that children's allowance was raised from 5s 3d to 7s per week. An invalid father, a widower and. dependent, was put in the same .position as a widowed mother dependent on a soldier. Mr Harris: "Will a soldier's wife alsc get separation allowance? The Minister: The wife's allowance does not affect a father or mother. Mr Young: Have yoti made provision for an aged" invalid father who is not a widower ? The Minister: No, we haven't. Mr Malcolm pointed out that it was very anomalous if both parents, being invalids, got nothing. The Minister replied that anomalies could not be avoided, but" this showed the wisdom, of not making allowances statutory. Lie had ur.der consideration a proposal for. the Financial Assistance Board to deal with cases of chronic invalid wife or child.

Tho Minister gave the following esfci-j ■ mate of the costoorir allowances 12 j months hence, based on present liabili-j . ties plus thirteen further reinforcements :— v Wives: Present rate, £310,000; new . rate, £826,000 ; increase, £525,000. ! Children: Present rate, £240,000;!; new rate, £318.000; increase, £71,000.; Widowed mothers, brothers, sisters:; Present rate, £10,000; new rate, £13.-; 000; increase, £3000. j Totals: Present rate, £558,000; new | rate, £1,157,000; increase, £599,000. \ *f the Second Division League's pro-' posals had been' adopted, the liability : would have been £2,088,000, or an increase of £1,500,000. These estimates, contimiod the Minister, were based on the reduced quota of reinforcements settled during the last low days, bringing the number down to bedrock. Mr McOombs: AVli.'it- is the monthly number now ? Sir James Alien : .1 am not authorised to say. By direct wish of the Army Council, they do not desire us to disclovse what the percentages of our rein-t'orcenif-nts are. Tho Premier vigorously defended Sir

.James Allen against the criticism levelled at him., and .indignantly declar- ( <>d that ati attack made by Mr Witty was unfair, unjust, and ungenerous. ■ He. declared that at that morning's ■ caucus 50 out of tho 52 members pre- : sent voted for tho Government's proposals, showing how deeply impressed they were with the Finance Minister's statement of the position. 'Ihe Premier , also raised a strong protest against the! tactics of the Second Division League,' the bargaining of which, he contended, was not what they ought to have expected from men of our own ra^c and '■ country, especially when 9000 married! men who at the front had cheerfully ac-' reptod very nuich less t lian Avas now I being proposed for Second Division men. Mr Webb declared that the interest on the difference between tJic (Second Division League's requests and the Government's proposals amounted to only one shilling per head or the popn-i lation. The debate which, followed Mas on critical lines, members urging in partitar increased children's allowances. Mr Wili'or<l stated that a close examination of the Minister's h'guros allowed that tho increase in tlic amouncj the Government was £ivnv» to deDend-1 ents totalled £127,000 and''the irereas-' ccl. payments at the end of July £35S -I 000. \Vhy had tho Minister oF De--fenco first estimated l!ie cost of aLlowance.s at £2,032,G91 when his present1 estimate was £1,157,000? ' j Sir James Allen replied that members' had failed to discriminate between r.o-: Uial payments ami estimated liability.! The tatter up to September next would be £2,03 6,945. Mr Lee accused Ministers of being studiously .silent. If an;,thing had: been said at the caucus about finances, it should l)e I'opeated in tlio Houso. v. hich was the proper place to mako statements. Sir John Findlay declai-cd that full ftiidi'iee assurance's were given to tho. caucus, and if the House voted against j the proposals it would show a lack! of confidence in the National GoArer.nnient. Tile Government had stretched] the finances to the fullest possible! point consistent with financial safety,' and he fully appreciated the reasonableness of not explaining all.reasons publicly. However, there Avas no need for alarm. ■ Sir Joseph Ward said that when allowances were considered by Cabinet the fullest deliberation was given to the question ho wfar the country dared go, and tho resiilo was seen in tho proposals. "Then I say we ought to tell'tho Second Division to go about their business and ,'tay there " declared vSir Joseph Wurd". amid cries of "Heur, hear."' "We simply cannot do. ali this that is asked," he added. illt i« easy to say it is only borrowing another Trillion _or two millions. Do members lealise that afc ihe present moment we nave to get £28,000,000 m.. this country for war px.rposes alone this year?" To make up i'or the incieased demand-? tho Government would require a further £40,000 to £50,000 in taxation. The revenue \\las already up to between £17,500,000 and £18,000,000. Could the. country continue this alter the war? Tiicre were only three ways of raisingfurther revenue—by an export tax, a 1-011-tf.x, or increased Customs dutios. .[(■' rii p-xnci't tax was lmposer'. tlm heavy income-tax and mortgage-tax 'xippioduoers- Avoulcl j-equire to. be Jifted. A poll-tax was inequitable. Thus the

House would bo driven hack upon Customs duties, though imports' wero rapidly falling. r Finally Mr Payne moved an amendment to refer the allowances back to the Government ior the purposes of naking.increases. This was negatived by 41 votes, to 13. The House rose at 12.1.C a.m.