WAR PENSIONS BILL

Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2510, 10 July 1915, Page 6

WAR PENSIONS BILL

MOST GENEROUS IN THE WORLD APPROVED BY DEFENCE COMMIT* TEE. The Hon. J. ALLEN (Minister of ' Defence) moved the second; reading of the .War Pensions Bill.' Ho said that lie wanted: the House' 'to - understand' that'the Bill had already beeji • submitted to' the Secret_Defence Committee,, so that' thoi Bill might' be well thought out. and have th& confidence of the House.- : Ho proceeded to explain the provisions of tho Bill, a copy of which appeared in The: Dominion of yesterw : day.' m Tho Bill only became - operative on the force's leaving New; Zealand.' The present law'would; be made to apply to the present camps. The Com--monw<ealtih of Australia and the Mother Country had made their pensions ■ scheinoapply only' to warlike operations'—and tho only thing that could njeaawas action with the enemy. Our Bill went. further, and started from the time'a trooper embarked to leave. New. Zealand. The reason for the dividing line was that if they included the Trentham' camp they would- have to go further. and include the ordinary trains inpr camps of tho country. There :was even moro reason for . including the ordinary camps, for the men were compelled 1 to go into those- .There waa . another reason. The local medical ex- . amination was not always adequate, and men sometimes developed weaknesses ia camp and had to bo put out.' There were oases where a man did.jiot disclose , weaknesses, 'aiid these only became appareut.when ho w'as trailed. For that reason they assumed: when a man was ready to embark that he was fit- for.the purpose for which he was wanted. Sornetimes tho men had to-be returned at medically unfit even after they, had left, but it had :beeiy decided that -ulfi Bill' would! apply to them. With regard to a disabled soldier, he.,was-entitled to claim a: pension whatever his financial position was, but with regard to . -.tha wife and children it would bo required for him to 6ho\v that they were dependent on tho soldier befjro the; time he . left New Zealand. It was not desirable^ to pro.vidb pensions to the dependents when they '.had means of their own. Clause 3 made for application' to bo j made for a pension; within seven, years if /death resulted in. that . time. from causes.of the war.. In other cases the application had to be made at once. The schedule provided a pension of 25s< per woek for the widow of a private. ■ ,A member: It isn't enough! Mr. Allen: It is the most generojg provision made in the world. : The next best was the Canadian, brought in sine* tho war, which 1 was £54 4s. 2d-., as" oijr jCpmnjoa--\

•.wealth provision, by a Labour Government, was_ £1 per wcok, or £52 a year. * It was difficult to compare with Britain ~ because they. had adopted, a different : plan.. The minimunvfwas £26 . a year to the widow. In the case of the children, the rate was'the same as the Australian, ss. per week, up tcT 16 yeans. It was 55.-per week eact childj whether,, the child of the privato or.majorgoueral. In the higher wuka. the pension to the widow in Australia for major ;or brigadier-general was £156 a' year, whereas ours was £13 higher. Further,; in regard to children,'the pension i could be extended over-I'6 years: in cases of mental or physical incapacity. ; The last clause pift a limit oil the amount •to be • received. In tlio exso of a pri.vatoitwas £3. The soldier could leave £1 os. per week,to his widow, 15s. per week to his children, and £1 a we&k to other dependents,: and 50 on:. In the second schedule, for totar;'disablement, the ) provisions i were explained; as published! yesterday. W\th regard to partial disablement it had been decided it was impracticable to put in a schedule,' bo partial disablement cases were left to a board. He presumed the course adopted would be to make up to the man the amount he could earn if he-was engaged iii his ordinary , occupation; He thought the provisions were fairly liberal.l; Section 6 was. important- in ;that .' '~ it compelled a man to allot first to his wife and before making ; provision for other.dependents:,,'; > Mr.. Horns by: Does' the "schedule ap- " ply. to anything that may; be-paid from a local fund? Mr. Allen: No. Chuse •12 provides ; /where, the; pension may be affected.' • A provision had been made that'the pension would not be paid) to persons resident outside New .Zealand.' Later, if some reciprocal arrangement could • Tje made' with.other parts of the Empire 3 . modification might bovmade. . The Minister Congratulated. SIR JOSEPH WARD (Awania) said that iii fairness to the Minister he could ;Say, although the Bill had' been, before the Secret Defence Committee, it •ivas :his Bill. They looked upon its im3 portant provision as a National Billl and ho . expressed his individual. conl ,' gratulations to the Minister on tho rapf "visions in it. They never-had hatTa time when such demands Bad been : made upon-the resources of tGe country. The whole of the, decisions in the BUI were arrived at unanimously. He had. heard a "member say that the. were . not,high enough., attention to' , the difference between'superannuation \and pensions, form/the firßt instance tho;wnd was built-up by contributions' from' 'tho individuals , who were to bo benefited. In his' own view tho provisions wcro liberal, and in dealing- . ; a matter like tliis he felt that any. differences made 'with tho ; Australian scheme were wise. As to .the board to . . to-set. up, he .thought .the central-board ' should not bo .coiTfined to-one place' only. ..... There was", a proposal to ' nave separate committees in different parts of. tho country to cp-operato. He, thoughlj that sooner or later there should /also : be uniformity of pensions in, regard' to \ those who served, in the South African ,JVar and the present .war. He thought there was a difference in ;the scale, qnd any disparity should'he removed. - - v . / . 'Anomalies In the Bili. Mr. H.,POLAND (Ohiiiemiiri), while / whole-heartedly supporting the general ' principles .'of the Billj thought that it ■ was inadequate in some provisions. A ■widow got 255. per week, and a totallydisabled private 255. for-the rest of liis life.' Ho contended'that, say, a widow' of 25 years of age, without any children, would ,be in a much better position than ■;- a young man totally disabled. Further, ■ if tho man .was married, his widow got 1 only 12s. 6d. per week. It would! be far .better for her if .' her . husband was killed.-. He oriticised the fact that-th'e i. higher ranks got'higher pensions. It was following the system of: paying ac-, : cording to what the man had been ix>.ceiving;' A 'colonel's 'widow got-'much • .' more . than a 7 widow,- but the: I private and the colonel both alike risked Y. , their lives. The colonel, getting £750 :!-■'■. a year, might have had some other motive than puKO patriotism When he enlisted.: The' totally;ffisahled; soldier .', ivoiM oom© back penniless, iwhereas the ! colonel should ha,ve had. somefJiing laid s aside; It was not a light and proper thing that a distinction'should he made, '. between the, private and the captain, • where both aliko risked their I lives. Mr. A. S. ; MALCOLM (Clutha) thought that-the Bill might be liberalised in the way of making provision .for parents who up to the' death'of; their sons had not been receiving ; assistance from the sons'. He instanced a case'where a mother and: father,, now in good health aiid self-supporting," had sent four sons to the war. While those sons were alive they' always , had them to look to in the case of need arising. The Hon. D. BIJDDO ■ (Kaiapoi) also . : criticised the' provisions made • for-: disabled soldiers coming back to New Zealand/' They, should bo' adequately pro- : rided for, and 255. per week: was mot enough. The Bill did not meet his idea of' what was reasonable, let alone generous. .. . ■ : i ..! Mr. R. FLETCHER (Wellington , Central) voiced the same opinion lyith Regard to the pension for a totally-djs- ' abled private. They should bo lifted ', from'the, condition of penury thby would j be : in;if they.cnly , got' 255. aweek; |'Referring to the Pensions Board,.\he presumed that ono member of tho board • would bo a mcdical men, and that the others would be officers. 1 . He would like to .see a civilian on tlie board'. He thought the'allowance to'privato solshould be increased to an amount . sufficient to safeguard them against .want. - - ... . ■ N ' Increase for Total Disablement. ' .Mr. R. A. : WRIGHT (Wellington Suburbs) said ho wished, to compliment . jthe; Minister on his Bill, which ho be-, ■ lieved' was a good and sound one.; But he wished-to join with other honourable members in-suggesting improvements in the; Bill, Ho did not consider that''the allowance" of. 255. a week to a man permanently and totally disabled:was sufficient, and he wished'to' endorse all that ■ hadbeen said on this subject by other .honourable members; His opinion- was that men should bo given a pension' to enable .them' to. live' even: though dis- , abled, in reasonable comfort, and he : would support the Minister in imposing any .taxation that iiiight' bo required to -- .'raise the necessary money. Tho loast (possible that those'who ;did not go to : the i front could do was to do their utv most "to make the lot of those who had lost: health-'or limb in fighting for the Empire lighter. Thepeoploof to-day, he . .hoped, would never treat old soldiers, ■ ' . maimed and broken, as humaivwaste, as' such men had been treated" in other times, and he. hoped and believed that ,one of .the best things.that would be done by the people of the present would •be .that of-caring properly 'for soldiers injured,in this war. . .' Mr. A. E. GLOVER (Auckland Cen- ' - -tral).. supported tho -Bill, hut he', was understood to ,suggest that the allowance made should be more generous. £2 a Week. '' Mr. T.'-A., H. FIELD (Nelson) said - • that ho thought tho majority would be' . satisfied with the Bill, but still many lof the objections with regard ,to the pension for disablement carricd a great deal of weight. He thought the amount in this case should be raised to' £2 a Week. There was tho further point thai tho hoard - set up to consider partial disablement' would base their payments 'on the 255. paid for total disablement. That was anothor reason why the allow- , auce for total disablement should Ho made as high as possible?-■ Mr. L. M, ISITT • (Christchurch \ - North) agreed that 255. : per week was totally inadequate for any single man ,who came back totally disabled. Tljey ;jn,Ußt ! remember-that ...the., yast ffl»j.ori_ty_

of those men would have, had the prospect of earning from £3 to £4 per week. If ,the,; expenditure of the Bill was so much'that could only' bb met by a permanent tax on the income-of everyone, Ihe believed too one would object to paying it. On •• a further "point he wanted to know whether the mother of Englishman, would bo debarred from the pension/ Tho Minister had said that.it all depended upon the domicile of the parent. Something should be done in. the way of reciprocity. Tlie Bill was a huge advance on any, provision mado in any country m the world, but New Zealand was a singularly wealthy oountry. /Mr. A. .HARRIS (Waitemata) said that tlie wealth of New Zealand' should be taken into consideration, and in the Bill the Government had recognised its responsibility.' He thought the provision for widows was adequate, but_2ss. a week iwas not sufficient, for the; single young ineti who returned _ totally abled, arid should bo considerably * increased—perhaps to 355._ Ho thought that the proposal to'consider tho granting of a gratuity to widows remarrying should be deleted, and a clause substituted so that' thoy would not be left destitute." Some worthless men might got hold of the widows for the small amount/of money they would be entitled to on remarrying. Tho Bill was a liberal one, and ho was sure the people would express satisfaction with it. Mr.. A.WALKER (Duncdiii North) did not think the scales of pensions provided' were sufficient; a fairly material increase should be made. - , Danger , of Prodigality. •Mr. G. :W. RUSSELL (Avooi) said that the Bill was recognised as an advaaoi on. any pension. ,law , at _prosent. It might vbe' regarded as having been carefully considered by both sides, and had been approved by both sides of the House, when it was beforo tho Secret Defence: Committee.. It was very weHj to. say that we should pay as much as' we possibly could to men who have risked their lives, but in _his opinion Ministers had done wisely in trying, to forecast, the futuro.j?^TfiiTS"'iv'as' ,i a;'prsc- 1 tioal ''aspect'" to ths problem,'.'.'however, lest even tho. pensions themselves might bo imperilled by the magnitude of the scheme embarked upon. It would bo well for honourable members to consider' what the finances of- the country would bo at ithe end 1 of the war. Wo had borrowed for war-expenses two millions, and authority had been given lor ten millions more. The land defence :' expenditure would bo still , half a. million a year or more,- and if at the end.of'-fho war Germany was allowed to kcep on' ttie seas.a fleet of any strength then New Zealand would havo to spend at least half a million a year in some way or other on some form or •other of naval defence. , ,He beliov&T that tho Government had wisely chosen a : cautious course v in_ making Ihe pensions low to begin with. pensions'were now low,ylt_ did not follow that thoy would remain always a,t the same low rate. He believed' that the pensions" woufd' later be raised as the finances, of the country permitted. Ho'' also urged that the Government should introduce some legislation' ' to provide for the pooling of the patriotic funds.j.oii some kind of national basis. It was perhaps right that a certain proportion of tho funds should be retained under local control, but the bulk of the money should be pooled to form a National Fund.' This, money could ' be used to help. men partially or wholly disabled, perhaps by setting up sdmeof them in business of some kind. H® would also like .to see established: in different' parts of the country Soldiers' Homes, like the Veterans' Home in Auckland, where soldiers-could live in reasonable comfort. He apprfived strongly of the -Prime' Minister's plaii for establishing colonies .of fruit farms for returned soldiers, and' ho ' thought this scheme and other similar schemes should be organised at once before the men returned. He would ask those who thought - the l pensions were not large enough' to have regard to tho huge financial responsibilities that New Zealand was undertaking in connection with the war. ' • , No Need for Pessimism. ' Mr. W. T. JENNINGS (Taumaruniii) commended the Government on the Bill 'they had ,produced, but he would prefer to see the' pensions fixed'-': on o. more democratic basis. He thought that there was no heed for" pessimism, as to our finances.- He was also of opinion that patriotic funds should not be administered on any'local plan or sy stem.. In his own case ho had three sons at the war. : One had enlisted in tho Wairarapa, one in Taranaki, and one in London. , : . ■ • . ■ Mr. D. BUICK ffialmerston) congratulated the Minister on the Bill, arid he congratulated the House on the manner in 'which it had; received the Bill. He : would have liked to see the pensions made more generous, but he recognised .that there were limits to what we could-do, and he would leave tho Government to decide what - we should be justified in undertaking. Sir.' C. H. POOLE (Auckland West) approved of the Bill, but said he would like to'l see it' made more democratic. Bfe-' wdnid -like -,to see more liberal rates civen to the men. in the lower ranks. Better Treatment for Rank and File. Mr. Gri WITTY (Riccarton) said it was true that the Bill, was an advance on any previous legislation, but we had to remember that the men going to the 'front were-the flower of the country. We were inclined to shout "God Save the . King" • when the men were marching away'to the. front, but there/was' a tendency to forget them when tho war was over.' The rank and file were not properly provided for in the Bill though, before the .' war many of them niay have occupied : better. ;: positions than th.© officers.; . Mr. J. M'COMBS (Lyttelton) held that the Bill did not provide_,for the bulk of. thQ. people who, were going; to bo affected, namely, the pdrtially disabled. . /" ■' ' Mr'. W. A. VBITOH (Wancanui); recognised'.that. largo financial obligations could not .'bo undertaken without serious consideration, but ho urged the Minister to go on and increase the provisions of "the Bill, for tiie people of New Zealand, were anxious to do tfhe | proper tiling. Ho . thought that thoy j should, give, the jVliuister the assurance that they:, .would • support : !him. in extra taxation: if; it was for that purpose. Tho publicly-subscribed money should be reserved for- specially necessitous cases. At the same time he held that j Parliament should deal ■ with those who ; had suffered as the result of the South African war. . ' . . - Dr. H. T. J. THACKER (Chnstchurcli East) desired to cncourago the Minister to help tho lower grade men. Tho Bill had evidently been brought out in a military basis, whereas it should hav'e been brought out on a civil Mr. P. C. WEBB (Grey) said that some of- the greatest "flag wavers" when.: the men went away were prepared to pay them only £1 ss. per week when thoy returned disabled. Mr. J. ANSTEY (Waitaki) thought that there.should be no limitation of the number of children who could participate in the pensions. Further, he held that tho pension to the wife should be the same in all the sections. Mr. C. J. TALBOT (Temuka), in his initial address, expressed pleasure that all party feeling had been eliminated in discussing this, tho most important Bill that could come before the House. Thoy should approach tho matter as business men, for the finances of the country were to bo considered, but if they did err it should bo, on the sido of generosity. ' Mr. W. D. S. MACDOKALD (Bay of Plenty) said that the -Minister had to wovide sufficient so that if men' Had to Jift foUitiA aost..f«Tv £ woftthfl ±ke£

would' - know that adequate provision was made for tlieir dependents. ,y^ Count the Cost. Dr. It. M'iNAB. (ilawke's Bay) complimented, the Minister on tho iii 11. Ho nad worked out some figures as to tho cost of the scheme. Supposing that the war lasted two years, and that tlie force from New Zealand reached 50,000 men, tho cost of. raising tlie aliowanco to privates by ss. a week wouldJie not less tlum £30,000 or more) than £10,000, so_ that to increase tho allowance to privates to £2 per week would cost not loss than £90,000. Perhaps this was a sum which the country could afford . to pay, but at the cild of a year Parliament. would know, better what tho total cost would bo and how loiig tho war was likely to last. Then, possibly, it could roview the payments to make them moro liberal. But until Parliar ment.knew what, the cost would be, what money would be available, and how rich or how poor this' awful conflagration would leave the world, the House x woiild bo wise to accept the Minister's Bill- He would support every paragraph in the Bill, but • he did not wish, this to be accepted as meaning that ho was wholly out of sympathy with what had been said bysome, honourable members who had preceded him; He did not agree, however, that , all should recoive the same pensions.' He 'did not subscribe to the philosophy that tho youngest enlisted private gave services of benefit to New Zeajsnd equal to those given by, say, the General Officer Commanding. Other speakers in the debate'we're: Messrs. It: M'Calum (Wairau), J. A. Hanan (Invercargill), J. Payne (Grey Lynn), H.'- J. 1 H. Okey (Taranaki)< THE MINISTER IN REPLY, AN ACTUARIAL REPORT. Tho Hon; J. ALLEN, in-reply, said that he. had got an actuarial report on figures representing 50,000 men, privates' and N.C.O.'s, based on twice the EngI lisli rates, which was an mider-estimato I as regarded tho rates to be paid widows here, and also as regarded total disablement. The' English report had been based on a 5 per cent, and 10 per-cent, death-rate, and 6 per cent, and 12 per cent, disablement rate. Ho intended to give the figures on a 10 per cent, deathrate and 12 per cent, disablement rate.. If'the war lasted one year, on. a ba6is of 50,000 men the payments for widows would bo £94,000, 'permanent disablc- . ment £190,000, and temjwrary disablement £165,000. The total for one year for privates, and N.C.O.'s would bo - on that basis £449,000. The figures for two years on the same basis—and if the war lasted I .two years he thought more. . than 50,000 men would leave these ' shores—the figures would bo, at alO per i. cent, death-rate and a 12 per cent, dis--5 iblemont rate, as follow: —For widows, ;£188,000; • permanent. , disablement, : £380,000,. and temporary disablement £330,000, making a total of £898,000/ . a two-year war. That did not include officers, and was an under-estimate on' the' pensions to be paid here. Of course, tho figures would decrease'as the years went on. Replying to the statement that the Mother Country provided £65 as a minimum for a' private, ho said that it should be remembered that £65 in England was all that was provided, and there'were certain limitations. No allowance; was mado for tho "wife. In New Zealand a married private totally disabled would receive £97 10s. An amendment would be introduced into the Bill ,in. Committco to remove the limit of time imposed within which a man was required to prove injuries or disease • contracted on service. ; Every man who left the shores'.of New Zealand would be provided for in the Bill. The men. who died at Trentham would be: provided for under 'the Act of 1909. Ho hoped that some measure of reciprocity ill regard to the pensions wouldbe entered into between' New Zealand, tho Mother Country; and the other Dominions. • He iigreoi with certain 'honourable •members . that Jfow Zi-aiand .should do 'as the Mother Country had done in tho matter of teaching trades to incapacitated soldiers. He assured "honourable members that he ; believed th 6 taxation to come would be laid upon tho shoulders of thoso best ablo to bear it. ' The B'M was rwid u time. ', ; The .House rose at oi4o a.m. ii 11"2.30 p.m.-on Tuesday. , ■' .