REDUCTION OF PENSIONS.

Press, Volume LXVIII, Issue 20495, 14 March 1932, Page 13

REDUCTION OF PENSIONS.

REDIKJTIUJN «-»r irjaiio*v*-.«. 10 THK EDITOR OF TB» PBISB. Sir,—ln the turmoil that has arisen over'the economies proposed in our national expenditure, the outcries from the different classes who are in danger of being affected rise shrill and strident, and in the deafening clamour the claims of quiet Season to be heard may bo drowned and lost. Human nature being what it is and pretty mucli of.an unchanging quantity, we might have exnected thii When any burden is _to be imposed, or any sacrifice made, the in'stinct is to : *Pff™-fi£ demand that it be borne by "the other felTow " Unfortunately to-day each of us is the other fellow. ff the°S£ ' sSi beneficiaries who Sraw pensions and allowances .First let me make it clear that although I deal he™ wST pension economies, my remle w *£ cost of living at the time S 6 fixtu°on L C e 0 t St u 3 ° tike, "for instance, of nxaiion. d grante a m . SSiCSa).^ of Sving was lyitf or *«."; . ftk r f a ma n was then about its simple then granted 30s per w , amount . and recognised tact that tnai^ could be «4»?^ pr b y off than ieave the P^onerjw he was when be.-was iv * t dearer years In »»« ago . is equal toJWs. ten to « th ' eniieature We do not require »ca con of the Government SatisJ S . ( s fa? ■^ bm value now/than.SOjrwaj then. If that be so-*nd I a"" B *^ practical experience-wherein »..«

any unfairness or hardship if the pensioners should, in a time of national financial stress, have their pensions docked by. an amount that will still leave them as well off as in the dearer years when they drew, the larger pen sion? In regard to old age pensions, hj» there not a reasonable precedent for reducing them to hand in the fact.that they were increased in the booming years of plenty of money and high prices? It is now equally right to reduce them in this time of scarce money and low prices. Had the cost of living increased during the past two years as much as it has decreased there is no question that there would have been an outcry for an increase long ago.—Yours, etc., JOHN STEAIGHT. March 12th, 1932.