RETROSPECTIVE ALLOWANCES

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 193, 10 May 1919, Page 6

RETROSPECTIVE ALLOWANCES

There is a- deep sense of grievance amongst a section of married returned soldiers oyer the attitude of the Government in the matter of retrospcctivc reparation allowances to tfives and also those for children. The grievance is a very real one and should be immediately removed. Briefly stated, the position's that married men who enlisted with the earlier reinforcements were worse treated than those who_ enlisted later, and the steps now being taken to repair this condition of things stop short of doing that full justice to the men which all must desire to see done. The wives of the married men who enlisted and went overseas with the earlier reinforcements received Is. a day separation allowance and Gd. a day for each child. Later, the allowance for each child was increased to 9d. a day'; still later to Is. Gd.' a day, while the separation allowance in the caso of a wife was increased to 3s. a day. It has been urged for a long time past that those families which were paid in the earlier stages of the war the lower scale nf allowances should be paid the difference between the payments made and the increased scale which camo into force in 191 V. This is a matter of simple justice, and hap,pily the Defence Minister last, session admitted the principle of such payment-. Sin Jmies Allen then intimated that a sum of £440,000 would be set aside to provide retrospective allowances to the wives of the men who enlisted in the earlier reinforcements. But it has now been determined that these payments shall cover only the oeriod from the date of embarkation of the married soldier and not from the date of his entry into camn. :Thn difference on the. average probably represents a period of aIjOKS four months, which at 2s. a day would mean £12 a bead. "Why should, the. married soldier's wife lose this £12? Why should the date of embarkation be fixed as the date from vh'ch the retrospective payment will be made, wlvn it is eustomar.V for pay to start from tho time the soldier enters camp?

The MlNiSTun of Defuxce has made an explanation on this point, hut it only goes to show that there is .1 temporary difficulty in sonic cases of making the payment from the date of entering «mip. . It seems that the records of the earlier reinforcements arc in a very incomplete state, and that it will take some time to go through them and sort out the dates at which men making claim for the retrospective allowances entered camp, whereas their date of embarkation is more readily ascertained. But what docs this contention;actually amount to? Merely that it will take a little longer time to ascertain the amount due if payment is made from the date of entering camp. , The solution of this difficulty is obvious and simple. The Minister very properly docs not want to keep the wen—or rather their wives—out of their money any longer than he can help; let him therefore make the payments in two instalments. .He can, as proposed, pay next month that portion of the amount calculated from date of embarkation, and make a second payment when the amount is ascertained of that portion due for the period between entering camp and embarking for overseas. _ -The men are just as much entitled to tiyi latter portion as they are to the former. Moreover, we arc. confident that public opinion.,will also strongly favour tiie payment-to these early married volunteers _ of the retrospective allowance in respect of their children. Their families -had to scrape and pinch' on the allowances made in the earlier stages of- the war when the financial outlook for the country was uncertain and the Government - hacl to act with extreme caution: but now the situation. is.changed, and the-least that can be done is to grant them this small recompense which places them on the same footing as those who c-nlistcd later. -The country today can afford to, make this payment and it should bo made. Moreover, the sooner it is decided to raakf. it .the more it is likely to be appreciated.