THE RETROSPECTIVE ALLOWANCES

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 261, 31 July 1919, Page 5

THE RETROSPECTIVE ALLOWANCES

PAYMENTS STILL PROCEEDING

PROBLEMS ,0F ( DISTRIBUTION,

The payment of grants in lion of retrospective separation allowance to members and ex-members of the Expedition aiy Forco has proved a more complicated task than the Defence authorities origin, ally anticipated, and the work is not yet completed. Much examination of records., has been found necessarv, and in some cases it has been difficult" to decide who is entitled to receive tho money. Up to July 14 warrants to the number of 6655 have been issued, representing a total outlay of ,£257,789. Tho first estimate provided for tho payment of roughly 12,000 claims and for the expenditure of .£495,000. It may therefore be assumed that slightly, less than half the applications are still awaiting final notion, and that approximately tlio samo proportion of the moneys originally allocated, has yet to bo destributod. Of the above warrants, 399 were for amounts over ,£IOO, and no less than 4459 represented in each case .£SO and over. The applications, made disclose a good deal of misapprehension regarding the grant. lit many casa?* it has been erroneously, assumed that it forms part •of the: soldier's pay, but as a matter of ■ fact the present payment represents a Government grant to tho. wife or guardian concerned, to supplement tho assistance already received from the soldier; that it is not payable as a mattor_ of course and'cannot be claimed by either of the parties immediately as a matter of right. ~'''■ A certain , proportion of the, applications included a reference to children's allowance, and many claims have also been received from widowed mothers and other dependants. As indicated, however, tho present scheme does not provide for a retrospective grant to other than a soldier's wife or to the guardian of his motherless children—and then only where the ordinary, separation allowance has been credited to his account. General misapprehension also appears to.exist regarding the dates between whiohjthe grant is effective. In the first place, payments afo mado only up to December 31, 1917 (wife), and .to April 30, 1918 (guardian), as from January land May 1, 1918. respectively, the full allowance of Ss. a,. day in each case has already com©. into effect. Many .claimants have' made tho error of lodging applications for periods up to the time of discharge or decease after the dates quoted, the erroneous impression having apparently gained ground that the grant is payable in respect of the full period' of service. Another important feature which many have overlooked is that payment for any camp period is not included. Thus, tho wife of a soldier who sailed with any Reinforcement later than the 33rd draft, which embarked at the' end of December, 1917, is placed outside the scopo of the 'grant. ' In the samo way, where the soldier has reported for duty after service abroad, and has not again em-, barked, the grant is made effective up to the date of re-entering camp only, and not- to also cover his second period of training with a later- Reinforcement. Unexpected difficulties have been presented where the disbursements of the moneys for motherless children is concerned. It has been found that many soldiers who v appointed guardians upon their departure overseas, to whom guardians (i.e., married allowance) was paid, have made new, arrangements since their return; and that they have either therhselves assumed control, or appointed other persons to look after their chil- , dren. These cases may be brought under three headings:—(l) Application by the guardian who has received the Ordinary allowance and is still acting in the capacity; (2) application by a new •guardian who has assumed control since the soldier's return; (3) application by the soldier, himself, who is again caring directly for his dependants.. In either of the first or second instances,. application should bo made by the guardian, •but to avoid unnecessary trouble, it is advisable ~that;..this,,.'Bhould. .be supported by a written • statement from, the soldier confirming the appointment of a. guardian, and stating that he is;agreeable to the retrospective grant' being paid to this person direct 1 for the. children's benefit. In the second instance, the authority from the soldier- should embrace nn explanation of the change of guardianship.