THE DEFENCE REPORT

Wanganui Herald, Volume LIII, Issue 160739, 27 August 1920, Page 5

THE DEFENCE REPORT

VIEWS OF MEMBER FOR WANGANUI. CURTAILMENT OP EXPENDITURE URGED. Speaking in the House recently on the motion that the Defence report be laid on the table, Mr Veitch drew attention to the alarming extent of the appropriations for Government departments, pointing out that during the last financial year these had increased by over £5,000,000. This proved that there was extravagance somewhere. Proceeding he said: MONEY WASTED. It is our duty to try to find out whether that money has been wasted. Let us look at some of the phases of the expenditure in connection with Defence matters generally, and let us see where money has been wasted. I look at the cost of war pensions, and I find there has been no money wasted there. The estimated cost of war pensions for the last financial year was £2,000,000, but that amount was under-spent by £187,000. Gratuities were estimated to cost considerably over £6,000,000, and the actual cost is a fair amount under £5,000,000. There has been no extravagance there. In connection with the cost of pensions during the previous financial year, we find that of an estimated expenditure of £1,500,000, only £1,199,000 was erpended; in other words the estimated cost of pensions was underexpended by over £300,000. There has been no extravagance there. Now let us look at the total cost of the Defence Department, and we find, as shown in the estimates of the Defence Department, that the actual amount for general administration of that Department has been reduced by the sum of £48,000; but at the same time the cost of personnel in the Defence Department has been increased. In other words, the cost of maintaining the Defence staff during the last year has been increased by £30,800, although the general cost of the whole Department has been considerably reduced. HIGHLY-PAID OFFICERS. That points to wasteful expenditure in the employment of highlypaid officers. I do not say that it does, because I am not able to analyse the position with the information available to me; but it does appear to prove that the statements made by the hon. member for Hurunui have some force in them, inasmuch as he expressed the belief that there were too many highlypaid officers still clinging to the Defence Department. I repeat that the figures shown in the estimates and the general statement of the situation disclosed in the Budget prove' that to be the case. I am asking the Minister for information on these points, and I shall be glad if he can give the House some enlightenment on them. WAR PENSIONS. I have referred to the expenditure of mouy (n military rfusions, and T am sorry to have to sa;y that after having had considerable experience in corresponding with the Department I have come to the conclusion that the system of awarding war pensions should be very considerably revised, gravest injustice that attaches to the practice is that it a 'returned soldier is suffering from a disability and there is any possible excuse for assuming that that soldier had a pre-war disposition to it the soldier is called upon to prove that his disability after the war is not due to any pre-war disability or predisposition. It is grossly unfair to the soldier. I am going to draw the Minister’s attention to two out of a number of cases which have come under my notice. I will not name the men, but I will give the facts briefly. The first case has reference to a soldier who is a married man, and who is at present in hospital suffering from a complaint w r hich I believe is entirely attributable to the war service; yet this man is not able to prove that his disability is attributable to war service, with the result that although he is lying in the hospital, and has been there for many weeks, he has not a penny of pension coming to him, and his wife is depending entirely on the charity of friends for her living and for pocket money. It is not fair, Mr Speaker. I do hope that the Minister will try to take a more sympathetic attitude towards this particular case and other such cases. The man to whom I am referring has a particularly good record as a soldier. I have that in writing from his officer. The man’s record of work at the front - is particularly good. It recorded that his enthusiasm for work was exceptional. His officer has put it in writing that the man never cavilled over anything he was asked to do, and that he went on working until he could work no longer. The arguments put forward that the man’s present condition is attributable to a pre-war disability are quite contrary to the facts of the case. He is a holder of the Military Medal, he is a man of first-class character, but because he cannot prove that the disability he is suffering from now is not directly attributable to his condition before he went to the front he is turned down. Mr Wilford: That is very wrong. Mr Veitch; I can assure the hon. gentleman that what I have said is not in the slightest degree over stated. For the sake of the man’s feelings, I refrain from giving the full particulars of the case, but if I did the House would be satisfied that the disability in question was not attributable to any fault,or vice attachable to the man; he is in every sense a good-living man, yet, notwithstanding the fact that he is lying in hospital and was a first-class soldier, he is without a single penny of pension, and his wife is living on charity. I know of a number of cases, but I shall only refer to one other, that of a man who had never had a day’s illness in his life before he went to the war. He went to Gallipoli, where he was slightly wounded, which developed into blood-poisoning. He recovered and want into service again. 1 He was wounded a second time, but some-

what seriously; On this occasion blood-poisoning set in again in an acute form, with the result that he was discharged from the forces. He began heavy labouring work at once, which, owing to his weakness he should not have undertaken, but whilst so engaged he met with a minor accident through slipping on a stone which dislocated his ankle, but owing, presumably to the condition of his blood, blood poisoning set in for the third time. He is now told by the military people that because the accident took place after he had bean discharged he is not entitled to a pension. It would be a much more reasonable argument that his present condition is not due to the fact that his blood is not yet clear of the poison that got into it as a result of the two previous cases. This is another case in which the man is getting no pension at all. He is in a very bad way physically,, his foot is much too bad to permit of his undertaking any heavy work, and yet he is denied a pension. A CHANGE WANTED. - Now I am not going to say that the Pensions Board is parsimonious and is intentionally cruel or unjust to anybody, but I do say that either the existing law is unjust or the Pensions Board is parsimonious. I am not a lawyer and not going to enter into a debate as to the meanings of words, but one of those two positions is the case to-day. Therefore, I want to appeal to the Minister of Defence to do one or two things, either to change J;he personnel of the Board and give us men who will be more generous in their consideration of cases and their decisions with respect to them, or give us a wider law that can be interpreted more to the benefit of the applicants for pensions. I do not believe there is a member of the Ministry or an hon. member of the House who is desirous of perpetrating a grave injustice as I am disclosing now. I believe it is only necessary that the attention of Ministers should be drawn to this grave situation to produce some good results, but I do hope the Minister will act as speedily as he can in order to relieve the sufferings and anxieties of these particular people. This second case that I am discussing is also the holder of the Military Medal with a first-class private character and an excellent record as a soldier. I won’t go further in that direction, Mr Speaker, although there are many cases in the Dominion which could be quoted—cases of hardship such as I have just described. BORROWED MONEY. The point that seems to me of more importance than the figures in connection with the Defence Department itself is to ascertain how much borrowed money has been spent in connection with Defence since we had the Budget of 1919 placed before us. The Budget of 1919 gave us a very complete statement of the condition of the War Exnenses Account, which on the 31st March of that year showed a credit balance of £7,979,000. We also have a general statement in the same Budget about the condition of the War Expenses Account to 30th June, 1919, and it shows an unexpected balance of £8.359,553 on that date; but in the Budget of 1920 all we have in connection with that- very important account is the aggregate of the war expenditure during the entire war period. It does not disclose the very important phase of the Department’s finance, namely; how much money has been spent out of the War Expenses Account during this financial year. All we know is that there was a sum of over £8,000,000 on the 30th June, 1919, standing to the credit of the War Expenses Account, and we have in the Budget of 1920 a promise that the details showing the position of the various items will be placed before us later. Now, Sir, I think it is a pity that the Minister of Defence has not seen fit to place these figures before us at this stage, because I believe that is the Account which we require to carefully analyse in order to see whether there has been extravagance during the period of demobilisation. It is unfair to private members that they should find themselves in the position, while discussing the Defence Department’s report for the year, of not being able to analyse the most important account dealing with defence expenditure. I hope that the.. Minister will do his best to make the details of this information available to us, because I can see quite clearly that for any waste that may have been going on in connection with war expenditure that is the account to which we must look. A NOTE OP WARNING. With respect to the matter of the general Defence policy, I would like to sound a note of warning, because there is always a war weariness after a war, and naturally there is war weariness after the greatest war the world has ever known, as far as we know its history. There is a possibility that after-war weariness will lead us to go too far in the direction of cutting down the efficiency of our Defence force. I believe that no nation can rely upon continuing its existence unless it keeps itself in a condition that will enable it to defend itself when defence is necessary. SYSTEM OP TRAINING. There is no doubt that the terri- 1 torial system has not given the satisfaction which was expected of it. That must be frankly admitted at the outset, because it is a fact which seems quite clear, for when our trained soldiers went into camp they were put into the ranks at the very beginning of the camp training, and underwent exactly the same course

as recruits who had received no military training at all, although this may have been done in. order to have a leavening of trained men among the untrained groups of men who went into camp and commenced their training there. I think New Zealand should be able to find a reasonable sum every year to maintain a system of defence, but the real question we have to ask ourselves is in regard to the class of military training we should adopt. There is some doubt in my mind on this point, and I would very much like to hear the opinions of men with wider military experience than myself before I make up my mind on this point. It appears to me that W'e should, as far as possible, make our military training system easy to the people; that is to say, we should usurp as little as possible of the time of our young men, which might very well be used for educational and other purposes in this period of reconstruction. We should cause as little irritation and inconvenience as possible, and finally we should aim at the highest point of efficiency. I am inclined to think as a layman that the present territorial system does not reach either of these ideals; so that it is quite likely that we shall find it necessary to alter our system in some of its main points. I certainly think that if we do not abandon the present Territorial system altogether we should reduce the time of training, for the report of the Defence Department of this year shows clearly that even with the expenditure of over half a million a year we were not training anything like all the men who were eligible for training; so that it appears to me we have been over-training a portion of the men and leaving the other portion untrained. It is for the military experts to devise a-echeme that will overcome that which I believe to be the main defect in the system. We should also bear in mind that the general physical efficiency of the people is a matter of importance. It has been brought home to us to an astonishing extent during the war j qnd I hope when the question of de- ' fence comes up for consideration in detail, and when a new system is being devised, we shall keep in mind very carefully the desirability of improving and maintaining the physique of our young people by keeping clear of parsimony to the extent of insuring some reasonable and sufficient system of defence, and at the same time trying to reach those two points in such a way as will put upon the people a minimum amount of cost and inconvenience.