WAR PENSIONS.

Taranaki Daily News, 16 November 1915, Page 4

WAR PENSIONS.

BY THE MINISTER. -By Telegraph.—Press Association. Wellington, Last Night. Referring to statements published rs* tga-rding the ])ayment of war 'Hon. A. M. Myers says:—"Some state* .meuts have been made to the effect (that pensions should be granted regard* Uegs of any consideration. The funda* omental principles of the Act, as decide* <)y Parliament, are, as far as the soldief •is concerned, that his pension is award* 'ed with due regard to the extent of hif disablement, which must have arisen oul of his employment as a soldier; and af rfar as the dependent of any soldier if concerned, that his or her circumstance* must In- taken into account, so tha| it may be decided to what extent assist* unec from the State shall be rendered.. As for as the returned soldier is conn cerned, he is asked to lill in a fornf on a single sheet, containing practiealli only two leading' questions, namely, t{ what extent he is disabled, and, if re* quiring personal attendant, has he mean* to pay such attendant'; Property of income lias no bearing whatever oil hit claim for pension, except that the simply question, 'What are your average earrn nigs?' is asked to help in determininf tho extent of his disability. No soldicl disabled by wounds lias been refused 4 pension. Pensions, however, have becrf refused in cases where soldiers hav* been stricken by illness, and who hi the time they have returned to the Do* minion have completely recovered. If some cases pensions have been refused and the applicant has immediately enlisted for the next reinforcements. Complaints have been made that wounded soldiers do not get the full benefit of the scale provided, and that their circumstances and those of their relatives affect the claim. In no case do the applicant's circumstances, or anyona else's, have any bearing whatever on his claim, and he gets the full benefit of the scale to the extent of his disablement. Several soldiers who hava lost an eye have been awnrded a pension of .CI per week. Another soldier with an amputated leg has .IDs per week, but there are many cases where soldiers who have been ill and have since recovered have not hen considered aa cases for the pension roll. A common error made is that any person who has been receiving an allotment of pav from a deceased soldier is entitled to a pension. The Act does not so provide; in fact, it is laid down that a dependent of an applicant must have been assisted during the twelve months preceding the date of the soldier's enlistment, except in the case of parents well up in years, who have a claim outside of dependency. The greatest exception seems to be taken to requiring tin: widow of a deceased soldier to state her affairs. By a recent amendment of the Australian Act the wife and children there aro granted pensions regardless of income or property, while it is Ihe position in New Zealand that the circumstances of the wife have to be taken into account. Cases are rare where the amount "ranted is below the maximum provided in Australia, which ranges from to2 for the wife of a private to .tint', for the wife of a general; or js a week less in each case than the maximum rates pay, able in New Zealand."