PENSIONS

Timaru Herald, Volume CXLII, Issue 20514, 4 September 1936, Page 8

PENSIONS

CIVIL AND MILITARY THREE BILLS PASSED BY HOUSE By Telegraph P*-ss Association WELLINGTON, September |. Urgency was accorded In the House to-day the passing of the Pensions Amendment Bill which was considered further in committee. The short title was passed after a filrthef brief discussion. Mr W. J. Polson (Nat., Stratford) moved an amendment to clause two with the object of debarring criminals from obtaining a pension in certain circumstances. He strongly objected lo people being taxed to provide a pension for criminals. Oh a division, the amendment was defeated by 36 votes to 11. Speaking to clause seven, several members of the Opposition referred to the pension of £3l to widows of Civil Servants, and they contended tfiat the amount was not enough. The Hon. W. Nash said that if a Civil Servant’s widow had a claim to a pen- . n she would receive in addition to the £3l, 10/- a week for each child. The Government had provided £2,300,000 to remove anomalies and make things better, yet the Opposition was asking that more should be done. There were thousands Of widows without children to-day who were getting no pension. The party that built the injustice Were now saying to give them some mote. The Rt. Hon. G. W. Forbes said that It was ndt reasonable on the part of Government speakers to meet suggestions from the Opposition with the retort “Why didn’t you do it?” He reminded the Government that his Government was facing deficits and was not able to spend money as the present Government was doing in these times of plenty. Mr S. G. Smith (Nat., NeW Plymouth) asked the Minister if he would make provision for Widows Without dependents that would enable them io get the benefits of the amendments made in the Bill. The only assistance such women could receive was from Hospital Boards. The clause Was passed. Deserted Wives r,™i n g clause eight, dealing with pensions for deserted Wives, Mr W. A. Bodkin (Nat., Central Otago) moved an amendment to provide that such pension could be granted in cases where there was no collusion between the applicant and her husband, and that her conduct was not the cause of the husband deserting her. Mr Bodkin said there were many cases of that kind where a pension should be granted. as a matter of right, but it was a dangerous clause. There were many married women who would be much better off if their husbands did clear out provided they could get a pension that would ensure a livelihood to them and their children. llr H. G. Dickie (Nat., Batea) said it was very difficult to prove collusion between husband and wife, and he suggested that means by which a husband could get away to Australia should be made more difficult. The Hon. W. E. Parry said he wotild tighten up that matter. He had no sympathy with a man who deserted his children. Mr Bodkin said in view of Mr Parry's statement, he would not press for a division and the amendment was lost on the voices. Mr F. W. Schramm (Lab., Auckland East) said it would not be wise to pass the clause as it stood at present as there wer~ several loopholes in it. He said the word “deserted” was too narrow, and a woman who separated from her husband by agreement and whose husband disappears would not be covered by the Bill. He suggested that the wording should be altered to cover a woman who had been left without reasonable maintenance. Mr Bodkin contended that such a case was covered as a woman had only to take proceedings against her husband to come within the scope of the Bill. A number of amendments moved by the Minister Were agreed to and the committee stages were completed. The Bill was read a third time and passed. Th- Family Allowances Bill and the War Pensions Amendment Bill wete also put through their remaining stages and passed. The House rose at 10.25 pm.