SERVICE GRATUITIES

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 176, 21 April 1919, Page 4

SERVICE GRATUITIES

MINISTER'S INTENTIONS POINTS TO BE CONSIDERED 11. has iilrnmly been announced that lII* licffiiici! Minister lias .decided to reconsider I hi! proposals ho made lo the House prior to tlie rising uf Parliament for llih pavnii'iil; of gratuities to soldiers rutimiiiiK 'from fiomce. The. Minister prniinsi'd I hat I here should Ijb two gratui-ties-olio a service gratuity payable only in respect of length ot service, and another payment to married men who had nerved when the separation allowance*! were not nearly so general as in the last year ot the war. The first announcement was that in respect of this hitter payment n sum Of JJ'IID.OOI) would be disbursed, and that no more could be given. It was an endeavour to meet the. demand of the Returned Soldiers' Association for retrospective allowances on the higher scale to those men, hut it was recognised at the time that, this sum of JftIO.OOO might not bo enough to give every married volunteer an allowance eriunl to that to which t.h.-. association considered ho was entitled. Subsequent calculations showed that the amount would be considerably less than enough to give what the association asked, and the Minister and the Government have agreed to an increase in this amount from JiiiA.OOO to something more than half a million. The payments will be made from this fund about June. ' . The settlement of the amount to be paid by way of sorvieo gratuity has proved to be a voir much more difficult matter. The Minister's proposal was to give to single men one week's pay for every eighteen weeks of service, and to married'men one week's pay for every thirteen weeks of service. There was, no complaint from the soldiers at the time about the amount offered, because they had probably not expected anything at ali But-since then announcements have been published as to the amounts being given in other Dominions, notably in Canada. The Australian scheme is not vet settled. Tho Government is now waiting for information from Canada before going on with our own scale. In the Other Dominions. It seems to be true that Canada is paying gratuities on a much higher 6cnle than New Zealand proposed to pay, but for the purpose of making a fair com- ■ parison it is necessary to take into account all the other payments or other aids given to the'returned soldiers in the two countries. The pay of the Canadian soldier was le3s than that of tho New Zealand soldier, but in Canada the separation allowances were probablyhigher in the ngr.-cgate. They were much higher in respect Of the wife, but much lower in respect of children. It is not clear how much, if any, financial assistance was given to soldiers in the Canadian Army in respect of liabilities while on service. It is not clear how much financial assistance is being* given now to the returned men in Canada to I establish them again in civil life. , , Possibly Canada is not giving to solders a sustenance rate while they are unemployed. The amount of the Canadian neiision is generally lpwer than the New Zealand scale, and there is no country in the world which has a more liberal schedule of dependents who amy be entitled to pension in respect of any soldier killed or disabled. It may bo that tho New Zealand gratuity scale will have to he' increased, but in making comparisons with Canada or any other country all the factors will have to bo considered, and this the Government is Irying to do. One of the demands that the Government: may yet have to face is that for financial assistance to the men who went ttwav before the scheme was inaugurated. Some! of the soldiers who went away with the earlier drafts without financial, assistance would undoubtedly have received it had they gone a.year or'two later, and the.v would have had a correspondingly larger amount to credit on their return. If a demand for retrospective financial assistance is made on behalf of I these men it would be difficult for the I Government to resist it.