In speaking in support of the Bill last night I referred to the section relating to old people who had gone into the County Hospital for more than three months and who as a result lost their old age pensions. I come now to the amendment which proposes that any charity given to old people shall not be considered as part of their income. To indicate to the House how this law operates at present, I will mention a case that came under my own notice. An old woman lived in a cabin in a village in the West of Ireland with absolutely no income, no land and no property, and was supplied free with milk by her neighbours. A value of 1/6 per week was put on that milk by the Pension Officer. It is to prevent such things as that occuring that this amendment in Deputy Dr. Ward's Bill is proposed. We want to see that nothing given to an old person in the nature of charity shall be considered as portion of his income, except he be left real property, money or real estate.
The Minister referred to the large amount of money paid out in pensions in County Mayo and he compared it with the amount spent by way of outdoor relief in that county. I can recollect the time when the Old Age Pensions Act first became the law of the land and, if my memory serves me right, the spirit, the intention, of the men who introduced the Act in the British Parliament was to relieve the deserving poor and to remove the stigma of pauperism from unfortunate people. Are we to take it now that the Minister would prefer to shove over the whole expense of relieving the deserving poor on the ratepayers and give assistance in the form of outdoor relief? If so, the Government had better be honest about it and should say straight out that the Old Age Pensions Act should be wiped off the Statute Book and that we should revert to a general scheme of out-door relief contributed from the rates. The Minister's point apparently is that nobody is entitled to an old age pension unless he or she can be classed as a pauper, for really that is the implication in the Minister's statement; it is the logical conclusion to be drawn from his statement. We are to go back to a sysstem of legalised pauperism and abandon the principle established by the Old Age Pensions Acts. We are to throw those Acts on the dust-heap and assert that the only people who will get relief in the State are those who can be classed as paupers.
Does the Minister consider it a special form of original sin that there is an undue proportion of old people in the County Mayo or that there is in that county an undue proportion of people who, even under the present drastic regulations applying to pensions, are receiving pensions? Are we to take it from the Minister that County Mayo people should be specially punished because they are living to an advanced age or because they are guilty of the crime of not being millionaires? The Minister well knows the reason why the people in Mayo are living under difficult conditions. He is not so ignorant of Irish history as that he has not heard of the cry "To hell or Connaught." An Act was recently passed through this House entitled the Gaeltacht Housing Act. Under that a huge number of areas in Mayo are scheduled. Even though the number is large, in our opinion—that is, the opinion of Deputies from County Mayo on these benches—we do not think there are as many areas scheduled as should be scheduled. In that Act it was laid down that special consideration would be given to people with only twenty-one shillings poor law valuation. The fact that the schedule for County Mayo is so large is an indication that the Land Commission and the Minister for Lands and Fisheries realise that there are large numbers of people with very small poor law valuations in the county. They realise that special conditions exist there that do not exist elsewhere in the Free State.
I pointed out last night the unjust way in which the old age pensions law operates, particularly in regard to assignments of land and property. I wish to draw the Minister's attention to the way in which old age pensioners are victimised when they have to give legal proof of their ages. He knows how drastic are the regulations against the old age pensioners. I would like the Minister to indicate if there is any truth in what I heard recently, that it is about to become the established practice of the Department, when asking for proof of age, to insist that where there is no birth certificate or other documentary proof, proof must be had of a clear indication that two years elapsed between the birth of the claimant and his elder brother or sister as the case may be. I was recently informed by a person who is a member of a Pensions Committee that this is about to become the practice of the Department. If that is so, I think it will be most unjust and it will victimise hundreds and thousands of people, especially in County Mayo. In very few instances are there parish registers from which the old people could obtain documentary proof of their ages.
Reading the Minister's speech and knowing the Department's practice in assessing means of claimants, I think a very interesting question arises in Mayo as to what may be the effects of the Gaeltacht Housing Act. Deputy Ward, introducing the Bill, mentioned about people being victimised because they have improved their houses. In the landlord days it used to be said that when a man improved his house or land it meant an increase in the rent. That is now changed to depriving a man of his old age pension because he improves his house or land. It will be interesting to watch the cases of pensioners who may get grants under the Gaeltacht Housing Act in order to improve their houses. It will be interesting to see whether when the house is improved the pensions officer will come along, credit the old man with a larger income, and thereby deprive him of his pension.
The Minister realises the economic and historical factors that brought about the existing conditions in Mayo. He knows there is no county in Ireland, probably, that has suffered so much and is suffering so much from the terrible evil of emigration. I know cases where small farmers with very low valuations had to send the members of their families to America or some other country. After some years those young people come back. They made a little money and they returned to the old home and started doing something for their parents. They set about improving the holding and they endeavoured to give their old parents comfort in their advanced age. The immediate result of their efforts is that the old people are deprived of their pensions or else their pensions are reduced considerably. The proper way to look at this matter of old age pensions is to ask ourselves—is this relief to the deserving poor or is it out-door relief to paupers? If it is out-door relief to paupers let us be honest about it. Let us abandon the whole scheme of old age pensions and let us, instead, widen the powers of the local bodies for giving additional relief. Let us honestly say that nobody is entitled to a pension unless he or she is a pauper and that anybody who gets a pension will be classed as a pauper.
On the debate on the Military Service Pensions Bill a lot was said about the unity of Ireland and about abolishing partition. While we have speeches like the Minister's on the old age pensions there will be little inducement to the people across the Border to encourage them to come into the Saorstát. In fact everything is operating in the opposite way. If, on the other hand, we face up to our responsibilities now and accept this Bill, while we will not be doing all that would be desired or all that should be done, we will at least make one step forward. We will be making an effort to undo the wrong and the injustice that has been done by the Act of 1924. We are not asking the House to do anything revolutionary or to make any startling change in the law. We are only asking the House to restore some of the conditions that existed previous to the passing of the Act of 1924. It will be at least an undertaking that some of the injustice that has been done on the old age pensioners will be at an end. It will be a step in the right direction. I cannot see why any just or fairminded Deputy in this House could vote against this Bill. I make a special appeal to all Deputies, especially the Deputies from the Western constituencies, to come forward and support this Bill regardless of Party and thus to help in some way to relieve the old people in the West who have suffered grievously as a result of the 1924 Act and to make at least some reparation for the injustice that has been done to them since the passing of that Act.
