Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

SOLDIERS' CLAIMS

CORRESPONDENCE "WITH MINIS TER FOR DEFENCE.

.The following correspondence on the subject of retrospective allowances has recently passed between the Minister 'for Defence and Mr D. Seymour, general secretary of the New Zealand Returned Soldiers' Association:

Writing on May 14th, Sir .lames Allen soirl:—"I have noted your comment with respect to the decision to make the wife's separation allowance payable as from the date of embarkation of the soldier, and desire in the I first place to give you my assurance that this condition was not imposed with any idea of reducing the sum due to the men of the earlier drafts. 1 may pay that all the original calculations as to the cost of making the allowances retrospective were based on .'the assumption that the men would l>e ! paid as from the date of entry into camp, and it was only at a later stage, I uiicui the details were beinx worked out, that it was found necessary to I fix the payment as from the date ot embarkation. In my opinion, the most | satisfactory method of convincing., yuu '.as to the difficulties which confront the pay branch in making th« payment on any other basis Is that you, in- a small committee nominated by your association, preferably men witn a knowledge of accountancy, should risit the pay branch and give the. officer in charge an opportunity of explaining the difficulties on the spot. I have instructed the officer in charge |to offer ynu every facility for this purpose, and if, as a result of the conference a satisfactory arrangement can be made for the payment of tho allowR"ce as from the date of entry into camp, I shall be only too pleased to give effect to it."

, ii> t,.ns Air Seymour replied, under date May 20tli: —"I am in receipt ot your letter of May 14th, 1919, in refer|f.ic.'' to my recent statement on the subject.of separation allowances. My I executive accepts with pleasure your assurance that your proposal to make the .'allowance payable from date of embarkation was not conceived with I any idea, of reducing the sum due to the men of the early drafts, but wishes ,to emphasise the point that, wnatei-ei the intention underlying the proposal, its clear and inevitable effect was to reduce very heavily the amount which should have otherwise been paid. |My executive has taken advantage ot your courteous invitation to confei with your department on this matter. We have considered the questions m i-nlved in considerable detail with the Offtcer-in-Charge of War Expenses, and jas a result are of opinion that the aunsinistrative difficulties alleged ar* quito inadequate as a justification tor the curtailment proposed. Even were lit granted that'defective records make lit impossible to ascertain' definite dates prior to embarkation from which the' sum due may be calculated, was it not a possible, and in some ways a justifiable, alternative to assign an averagt" period in camp prior to embarkation '? Further, even if this assessed period caused discontent, our view is that at least.it would have been preferable, to ignoring the pre-embarkation period altogether. It.has further been represented that the distinction between Home Service and Expeditionary Force men become operative as from August, 1917, and that if retrospective allowances were paid for the pre-emonrka-tion period they would be drawn by many men virtually •on home service, and consequently not entitled to them. This difficulty also vanishes on examination, because it is surely equitable as well as reasonable to assume that" those who embarked were in camp as E.F. men. Of. the rest, those who were discharged as medically unfit might fairly be presumed—with a small p-.argin of error —to be Expeditionary Force men, while the remainder might fairly bo regarded as Home, bervice. As you have been good enough to suggest that my executive should frame recommendations, we should be glad ii action could be deferred until our proposals could be endorsed by our conference which meets next week."

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZTIM19190521.2.12

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

New Zealand Times, Volume XLIV, Issue 10285, 21 May 1919, Page 3

Word count
Tapeke kupu
662

SOLDIERS' CLAIMS New Zealand Times, Volume XLIV, Issue 10285, 21 May 1919, Page 3

SOLDIERS' CLAIMS New Zealand Times, Volume XLIV, Issue 10285, 21 May 1919, Page 3

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert