MINISTER EXPLAINS PROPOSALS

Dominion, Volume 11, Issue 2, 27 September 1917, Page 6

MINISTER EXPLAINS PROPOSALS

THE PEOPOSBD ALLOWANCES. In the House of Eepresentatives in tho evening the War Pensions Amendment Bill was introduced by Vice-Eegal Message and read a first time. Sir James Allen, Minister of Defence, moved the second reading of the Bill. He said that the time had come to review war pensions. The First Division of tho-reserve was practically exhausted, and the Second Division was about to be called upon. Tho first class, the married men" without children, would provide, he believed, two reinforcements. He could not tell definitely when the men would be taken into camp, but probably it would be late in January or early in February. When the first class had been taken it would be necessary, unless tho war ended, ta take ihe men with children. The Bill represented an effort on tho part of the Government to deal fairly with the men who might fall or be disabled, and with their wives and children. He did not suppose that the Bill would satisfy everybody; but tho Government had to consider not merely the position to-day, but the position in the years to come. The burden to be placed on the country was a heavy one. The country was willing to bear it, and it was particularly willing now when sentiment was running high, but that feeling might die out. The pensions scheme had to. bo put on such a. basis that thero would not arise a demand tor its review in future years.

5 The Disabled Men. No pension scheme was sound unless it recognised certain facts. If a ..li.an was to live on his pension on his own that would not be satisfactory to him or the State. Adequate provision must be made for the completely disabled man, but the man who had earning power should be encouraged to earn, and to take, .- if necessary, tho training that would, enable him to do so. That principle had been recognised by Prance and Britain, and it was being recognised by New Zealand. Provision was made in the Bill that a man could be required to undergo treatment calculated to improve his condition. A man who refused to accept treatment might have his nonsioo cut down by one half. He hoped this power would never be used, but it was.desirable that the men should understand the position and cooperate in recovering their health as far as possiblo. If a man wont iato a hoe-

pital for treatment adequate provision would bo mada for hie dependants. The treatment would ho free. The Government was making provision for training of partially disabled men and for supplementary payments durinfr tho course of training. It wa6 necessary that the disabled man should feel absolutely sure about his pension once it had been made permanent. The Bill provided that permanent pensions should not he reviewed by reason of any chnngo in the earning capacity of the pensioner. That was an important clause, designed to act as an inducement to the partially disabled man to train himself and earn money. A schedule of disabilities had been embodied in the Bill fixing tho rates for specific injuries. The schedule was based on experience, and had already been adopted in practice. It would enableevery man to know his position.

Rates Compared. Under the present law the totally disabled soldier received .£1 15s. per week, and his wife 12s. 6d. per. week. The new scale was £2 per week for the disabled private and ,£1 -per week for the wife. In addition, a further pension of .-£1 per week might be granted ,on account of previous earnings, so that a totally disabled man and his wife might receivo M per week. The British and the Canadians had adopted the principle of paying the maximum 'pension to a man whether' married or not. New Zealand was providing a reasonable pension for the man, with additional pensions for the wife and children. In Britain the minimum pension for a disabled man was 275. Gd. The same sum wns paid to a single man and a married man. The Second Division League had adopted this British principle and had suggested that the minimum for the man should be 41s. 3d., with nothing extra for the wife. The Government was proposing a minimum of 40s. for the man with 20s. extra, for the wife. The proposals were better r'ian those of the Second Division League. The minimum pension for a disabled man, wife and three children was 82s. 6d. under the Bill. The Second Division proposal had proposed 725. Ocl. per week. The British payment was 40s. per week, the Canadian 555. Sd., and the Australian G7s. Gd. It was necessary to have a standard. The Government could not restore to his pre-war position the man who had earned JMOO or .£SOO a year. But the proposals meant that the financial position of the average worker would actually be better under the pensions scheme than if he was still receiving his prc-enlistment wages. The assessment oi pre-war earnings and the remaining capacity of the man would have involved a great deal of inquisition. For the soldier, wife, and one child, the ment was now paying £1 15s. in case of disablement. The minimum under' the Bill would be .£2 7s. 6d., and the maximum ■Si 7s. 6d. '-. .

Position of the V/ldow. ' Tho pension for the widow, said the Minister, was being increased by ss. per ,week, with an extra 10s. if she had children. There would be a special allowance in recognition of pre-war earnings, and it would be possiblo for a widow with one child to receive £2 17s. Bd. under the new scheme. The minimum would bo £2 7s. Gd., as against £1 12s. 6d.- under the present law. Tho widow could also receive a further 7s. per weok under the widows' pension law, bringing the total possible provision for the widow with one child to £3 4s. 6d. per week. Tho widow with two children could receive, in war pension and widow's pension, .£3 lis.' 6d. per week. A widow was not debarred from receiving a full widow's pension by .receipt of the war pension. The Minister.quoted some cases to show that already some disabled men wero in better financial positions than if they had not gone to the war at all. A railway man who had been earning £2 14s. a week, was receiving under the present pensions law 16s. per week more than before he enlisted.

Mr. Wilford: Can you give us a case of a man who was earning ;£5 per week? ■ Sir James Allen: "I have not worked it out. If the man has three children he can receivo ,£5 per_week under this scheme." The provision that had been made for men who had suffered disablement or lost their lives while in the forces but not on active service was liberal. The board could grant a pension if satisfied that the death or disablement had not been due to the soldier s serious negligence or' neglect. Mr. Poland: The "if should not be in

it. Sir James Allen: All the Acts I have seen have it. Mr. Poland: The Workers' Compensation Act has not got it. . Sir James Allen said the exception was made only in <>ases where the death ot disablement was due to the serious negligence or misconduct of the soldier. The clause was wider than similar clauses in other pensions laws. .

Marriages Allowed. The Government realised that it was not desirable to place barriers in the way of tho marriago of a partially-disabled man, and a provision not to be found in the pension law of any other country had been inserted. A man might marry within two years of his discharge, and his children, if any, would be entitled to pensions. This was an important concession to single men already at the front. Tho position of the widowed mother had been improved by the fixing of a minimum of 15s. per week if she had lest the son on which she was partially dependent, or 10s. per week if the. son bad suffered disablement.

All Soldiers Affected. The Minister added that the Bill covered all members of the forces, and was not confined to th« Second Division. The dependants of the 9000 men who were already at the front would receive the same benefit as dependants of men who had still to go to the front. He did not think there was need to alter the legislation regarding other dependants. The board had wide powers, and the system, was already more liberal than the system of any other country. Provision had already been made for parents and other dependants, even if they had not been dependent on the soldiers before the ran If no alteration was niado in the pensions law the annual lia.T>ility twelve months hence would be ,£823,000 i With the alterations proposed under tho Fill tho liability would be j81,0G3,M0, or an increase, of «E240,000, on account of the legislation.

ALLOWANCES SKETCH OP THE NEW PROPOSALS. Sir James Allen proceeded to maso a statement to the House in regard to allowances. It was not proposed that any alteration should lie made in pay of either soldiers 'or officers, but it was intended to inorease the separation allowance to the wife from 7s per week to "Is per week, anil tho child s allowance from ss". 3d. per week to 7s. per .week. This created an anomaly to which ho must call attention. At present a warrant officer receives .£3 3s. per week. An lieutenant received £1 is. a week. By the ineiwe that a warrant officer's wife would receive, the income of a warrant officer would be brougnt up toi that of a lieutenant. An officer did not receive any allowance on accouut or his wife or children, so that ui'der these proposals a warrant officer with a wife would have the same pay cs a lieutenant, and he would receivo in addition to that 7s. a week for every child, whereas the lieutenant received no sucn allowances, even if he had six children. He did not think it would be possible to remove all ihe anomalies. Some anomalies existed to-day. A warrant officer with two children was still paid the, same as a lieutenant, even if-the lieutenant had half a dozen children. Ihis was an anomaly which existed because in the initial stage it was not provided that there should be some more lmited pay for officers and that allowances should be made in respect of wife and children. It was now proposed in oider to'lessen-the anomaly to provide an allowance for the wife of the lieutenant, bringing the income of a married lieutenant up to .£5 ss:' a. week. Mr. Witty: Will these payments be provided for by legislationr Sir James Allen: No; they will be provided for by Army Order. They always have been, and I can sec no rcß6on for making any alteration. Mr Lee raised a point of order. Me asked whether mombers would bo in order on tho second reading of the Bill to discuss the statement being made by the Minister. Sir James Allen: There is nothing about allowances in tile BilL

Mr. Wilford asked a similar question to that raised by Mr. Leo. Sir James Allen: I have no objection to the discussion of them. -\ Mr. Speaker ruled that members would bo in order in referring to what Sir James Allen might say about allowances. Other Dependants. Sir James Allen said lie wished to make a comparison between tho pay and allowances of the New Zealand soldier and of 6oldiers of other parts of the Empire. The pay of the New Zealand private soldier was 355. a week, his wife received 215., and his children 7e. per week each. In Britain the soldier was paid 7s. a week, and the wife 9s. a week; the-first child 75., the second 55., the third 45., the fourth Ss. 6d. The total pay and allowances of a Canadian soldier was 325. Id. per week, counting the dollar' as worth 4a. 2d. In Australia the pay was 425., and the .wife got 9s. lid., as against onr 21b., and in Australia every child received 2s. 7k1., as against our 7s. An hon. member: What does the Canadian wife get? Sir James Allen: "I don't think the Canadian wife gets anything: lam not quite sure about that." He proceeded to refer to allowances to dependants other than wives and children. With respect to the widowed mother _ wholly or partially dependent on a soldier, the present provision was that she should Teceive 7s. a week, on condition that her income was not over 7s. a week, or that her total capital did not exceed X 250. The proposal was to incroase the allowance to 10s. n week, and to increase the incomo she was allowed to hare from 7s. to 10s. a week. In addition to that there were the allotments she would receive from her son at the war. With respect to an invalid father, a widower, dependent on the soldier, he was riot provided for in New Zealand, but it wns pi+iposed in the new Army Order to provide for the invalid father on tho same basis as the widowed mother. Provision was also being made for the children, brothers, and sisters of the soldiers whollv dependent on him. They would now'be entitled to receive allowances as if they were tho soldier's own children. Useful Comparisons. The Minister read the following statement showing the effect of the new proposals :— Statement showing Dresent and proposed weekly pay and allowances, with maximum possible under soldiers' financial assistance regulations:— . Maximum possible Actual Pro- with present posed £3 per pay pay week and and special allow- allow- assistances, a-nces. anoe. Wejskly Weekly Weekly ■Soldier 555. Od. 355. 955. „ , andwifo 425. Od. 665. 116s. ~ wife & lend. 475. 3d. 635. 1235. 2 „ 525. 6d. 70s. .130s. „ 3\„ 575. 9d.- 775. 1375. ,; „ 44 „ 635. Od. 84s. 1445. ~ PROPOSED PAY AND ALLOWANCES. i Or plus / Or plus oost maximum of possible soldier's with upkeep flnanoial. in civil Actual assist- life, minimum, anco, per per per »ear-, year. year. Bay £52. £ e. £ s. £ B. Soldier 91 0 247 0 299 0 , and wife 1« 12 30112 353 12 wife & lend. 163 16 319 16 37116 1 „ 182 0 338 0 390 0 3 „ 200 4 356 4 408 4 '/, ", 4 „ 218 8 374 8 426 8 AVERAGE EAHNINGS IN NEW ZEALAND, 1916-1917. Per annnm. £ s. d. Iu Public Sorvico employ ... 192 0 0 . In local bodies' employ 143 0 ,0 In manufactories and works— I. Skilled If 0 0 Unskilled 142 0 0

New Zealand in the Lead. Tho Minister, in his concluding remarks, said that he 'hoped honourable members would realise that the Government appreciated its responsibilities to tho wives and children of Ho hoped honourable members wouSS 7iclieve that every member of the Government -was anxious to do the best possible for our men and for their dependants, about whom thoy were soiruch concerned. He thought the legislation when it went, on the Statute Book, and the provision to be made under the new Army Order would placo New Zealand ahead of-any other country in Ji© world. He made no boast about this; we ought to be so. He hoped that the legislation proposed would stand any assaults that might be made upon it, even in tho times to come after the war, when limes would' bo harder, and the financial burdens would press heavily.

Asking for More. Mr. T. M. Wilford (Hutt) admitted quite frankly that some of the clauses in the Bill were a credit lo the Government. Under the Government's proposals the wife received £2 2s. per week, but that included her husband's allotment. He considered that the allowance alone should bo £2 2s. The married man was penalised as against the single man. Was there ono married can in the House who would like his wife to live on an amount under two guineas ai week while he went-forth to fight 'or his country? They had had no pronouncement yet as to what was to be clone with the Second Division with regard to medical examination. Would the Prime Minister tell the country how long after the ballot y, as a man'to be examined? The Prime Mm-, ister should also tell the country that once a man was passed as fit far active service every Act relating to uability should operate in favour of that man. Hear, hear.) Should they not give to the dependants of soldiers free medical attendance? Why should not the rate of pensions for married men already at the front bo made retrospective? He could not see why the Second Division, starting in January, should have any preference. The Second Division did not ask for it, and ho would not support them if they, did. Referring to the schedule he did not consider it fair to elaborate'on two special cases in which a low wage was earned in order to make out that the Government's .proposals were liberal. He asked whether the Financial Assistance Board proposals were not nlerely 'illusory. He knew the board had done good work, but what was the position of the man who had paid for his cottage, and had no rent to pay? He believed it would pay a man to buy a property, pay a J&O deposit on it, and let the rest rip. The Prime Minister said this would be bad advice. Mr. Wilford admitted that the Financial Board might turn such, an .ipphcation down. He asked how was it possible for a man to secure the maximum amount of £3. '~-., , , Sir James Allen said he could if he 1 ad heavy mortgages, insurances, and other liabilities. ■'. . A member: If he has got big financial interests. ~ Mr. Wilford said he would sooner see the allowance increased so that the wife could keep the wolf from the door. Was it fair that the financial assistance should • automatically cease upon the death ot the soldier. No one could suggest that the widow's pension would be big enough to enable her to meet these liabilities. It the purchasing value of the sovereign was going to continue doing down, how was a. wife going to live on thirty shillings a week? How was she going to meet her husband's liabilities twenty™x weeks after his death?. He believed the allowances to the soldiers should he made by statute and not by regulation. (Hear, hear.) Second Reading Carried. When the House met after the supper adjournment the second reading of the Bill was carried on the voices. Several members had intended to speak, and two oT Hiem were on their feet a moment after the Speaker declared that the ayes" had it. But their opportunity had gone. •