THE LAST PROBLEM

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 56, 29 November 1919, Page 11

THE LAST PROBLEM

WAR RELIEF AND WAR FUNDS TUK PERMANENTLY DISABLED SUGGESTIONS FOR DOMINION SCHEME The dispensation of permanent, relief to permanently, djsabled returned soldiers was discussed at the meeting of the Wellington War Relief Association yesterday Tho chairman brought to the notice of the executivo the problem shortly • to arise as to the relief to he given permanently to permanently disabled meu. His idea was that in a short time the 'Government ought to he able to furnish full particulars of the number and description of disabled men, and bethought it would be advisable to hold a special meeting of the Patriotic Societies'. Advisory Board early in the year to discuss somo scheme, preferably a Dominion scheme, for giving special aid to permanently disabled men. He mentioned, as one of tho difficulties in such a proposal,' that somo permanently disabled men were earning more nioney than they had ever earned Iwfore, and that these men were not under any economic disability. Some districts, lie pointed out, were already working on schemes of their own.

Mr. Hutcheson thought that it was deplorable that at this time there should lie piecemeal treatment of this problem. There ought to be no such parochialism. In distributing the residue of the funds there should be no regaixl to the special circumstances of some districts, which, perhaps, had large funds and light claims. There should bo a Dominion scheme,- and ; it should bo formulated . by. a ronresentative conference, in which the Government should |ake part, and the conference should call to its aid the best exnert assistance, medical and otherwise, obtainable in the_ country. He did not think the Patriotic Advisory Board would be the proper body to deal with this problem. • Mr.'Tripn said that he agreed.with all that Mr. Hutcheson had said, but lie su£jscstp(l ft ro&pHtiff of rho association to get "available information. ; Mr. Hutcheson said that if any societies proved obdurate in opposition to the Dominiori scheme, the Government should step in and compel them. Mr. MlntoHi said he feared that the societies would never agree to amalgamation of the fund 3. Thev had objected to it at the becinning of . the. war, and they would ■ nrbbably still object. ■ Mr, Fergusson: The business was then ephemeral; now it is permanent. Mr. M'lntosli suggested that the Gov«rnment might have to compel societies to pav at least some of their moneys into a fund for permanent Telief. Mr Ferguson: What, would be the result of that? Probablv the Government would' take over tho lot-and mismanage. Mr M'Tntosh 6aid that lie had no idea of a Government Department taking control. The money ought to be disnensed umipr the control of local committees ° r jlr. a Liiko ; . said that'it was almost inconceivable that relief should be carried on as at present, for a period of fifteen years or move, for man} men would. requir".,askance for■ m long a period as this. He had always contemplated; a time when b« n washing-Tip. and he thought that the best method would be the amalgamation of the funds and the adoption cf a scale of r«l:ef for permanently disabled Tn further discission it was pointed out that there was machinery at present for the Government'to exercise a measure of control over funds, and that the residue of such fiwds as those for ,lted Cross purposes wouM probably cohig into the common fund for- tho scheme suggested. But there was in the minds of members considerable doubt, about the willingness otlier pec-ell.-? t^ to the Wellington proposal, 'however proper it might be. In the end the following resolution, ol which notice had been given by Mr. J. Lewis, was agreed to:— "That at "the next meeting of the Executive Committee of the; association a special sub-committee be set up to con-, sider all cases of permanent or semipermanent disability." The. following comnrttee was set up-— Messrs. Tripp. Hutcheson, Luke, M'lntosh, Lewis, and Colonel Hughes; who will report to the executive as soon as ■possible., . . . • In - 'general committee discussion afterwards the question was raised as to whether the proposal was to cover dependants of soldiers as well as soldiers themselves.