I move:
In paragraph (c), page 3, to add at the end of the paragraph the words "or becomes payable in respect of a period previous or partly previous to such death."
In Committee on Finance. - Old Age Pensions Bill, 1932—Committee.
Sections 1 and 2 agreed to.
SECTION 3
In lieu of the provisions (repealed by this Act) of sub-section (2) of Section 2 of the Act of 1911 as amended by sub-section (2) of Section 4 of the Act of 1919 it is hereby enacted that in calculating the means of a person who is one of a married couple living together in the same house the following provisions shall have effect, that is to say:—
(c) where one member of a married couple dies, nothing which was reckoned or would (if such deceased member had been entitled to receive an old age pension) have been reckoned as means of such deceased member for the purposes of the Old Age Pensions Acts, 1908 to 1928, shall be reckoned as means of the surviving member of such married couple for the purpose of reducing the pension of such surviving member if any payment in respect of such pension was made before the death of such deceased member.
Amendment agreed to.
Section, as amended, agreed to.
SECTION 4
Question proposed: "That Section 4 stand part of the Bill."
I understood the Parliamentary Secretary to say that provision had been made in this Bill by which a person in receipt of an old age pension could be absent from the Free State for a period of six months. I should like him to confirm that. I understand that the provision made is that the six months period of absence will not count to break the period of qualification for an old age pension. If the Parliamentary Secretary can point out to me that the six months' absence will not deprive a person in receipt of an old age pension from receiving the pension during that period, it will completely meet the purpose for which I put down my amendment. It will meet my point if the Parliamentary Secretary will look into the matter and secure, if provision is not already made, that such a period of absence will not deprive a person in receipt of an old age pension of the pension for that period.
I do not think there is much in the Deputy's point. I would be very slow to give any facilities to people coming in from the Northern area which are not given to our people going into the Northern area. If a person from the Free State goes into Northern Ireland or across to England, the pension is discontinued. Similarly, there should be no obligation here to provide pensions for persons who do not comply with our residence qualifications. I do not think the Deputy can hope for any alteration in the position.
The Parliamentary Secretary did tell us, on the Money Resolution, that provision had been made by which, if a person in receipt of an old age pension went into the North of Ireland for a particular period, he would not be deprived of the pension while there, if not there for longer than six months. Will the Parliamentary Secretary confirm that?
The Deputy must have misunderstood me or I may not have made my meaning clear. Temporary absence from this country, up to a period of six months, would not operate to deprive a person on the residence qualification of the right to a pension.
The Parliamentary Secretary sticks to the policy that if an old age pensioner in Monaghan goes into Fermanagh, Tyrone, or Armagh for a period of two or three weeks, the old age pension will be lost in respect of the period he is absent.
Not at all. No such thing will happen in practice. Deputy Mulcahy probably has difficulty in realising that there is not at present the rigid enforcement of the law in the Old Age Pension Department that there was under the Cumann na nGaedheal administration.
I am up against this—that the clause which it is proposed to amend here distinctly says that the old age pension shall not be paid in respect of a period of absence from Saorstát Eireann. If we have laws, I suppose they will have to be administered. If it is intended to do certain things as reasonable, I suggest that it is easy to put these things down in black and white for the protection of the people for whom the laws are made, for the protection of the people who have to pay for the administration of the law and for the protection of the people who have to administer the law.
It is scarcely necessary to point out to the House that if an old age pensioner goes across to Northern Ireland or to England or anywhere else for two or three weeks holidays or for a change of air—and that sometimes has a good effect on the pensioner's constitution—that will not be looked upon as absence from the Saorstát for the purpose of the Old Age Pensions Acts. There does not seem to be any reality about this debate judged by Deputy Mulcahy's argument.
If I could understand from the Parliamentary Secretary that the pension will not really be stopped that will satisfy me, but what is being done here is a different thing.
The Parliamentary Secretary is not rejecting the idea contained in General Mulcahy's amendment? I would ask the Parliamentary Secretary to consider introducing before Section 4 the following amendment: "And excluding any sums not exceeding 15/- weekly by way of pension or allowance from any trade union, friendly or provident society or from any employer." The acceptance of that amendment would rule out the words to which the Parliamentary Secretary takes exception.
I would not be prepared to accept that.
Will the Parliamentary Secretary not consider it?
No.
Section 4 put and agreed to.
SECTION 5.
I move amendment 5:—
Before Section 5, in page 3, to insert a new section as follows:—
Clause (a) of sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Act of 1919 shall apply to every case to which Section 5 (repealed by this Act) of the Act of 1924 would have applied if it had not been so repealed.
Not many Deputies will be wiser after hearing that read. What it really means is this: At the present time in calculating the means of the claimants in the case of property which is invested or capable of being invested, the income shall be taken to be one-tenth of the capital value. That is the present law. What I propose to do is to substitute for that one-tenth, one-twentieth of the capital value up to the sum of £400, and if the capital value exceeds £400 one-tenth of the capital value of such amount as is more than £400. That is getting back to the method of calculating the means and income from such property investments or property capable of being invested as operated under the 1919 Act.
New section agreed to.
I now propose to delete Section 5. This is consequential on the amendment just taken.
Question: "That Section 5 be deleted"—put and agreed to.
Sections 6, 7, 8 and 9 agreed to.
SECTION 10.
(a) This Act shall come into operation on such day as shall be fixed for that purpose by an order of the Minister for Local Government and Public Health made after consultation with the Minister for Finance.
I propose amendment No. 6.
In sub-section (3), page 4, lines 16 and 17, to delete the words "Local Government and Public Health" and substitute the word "Finance," and in line 18 to delete the word "Finance" and substitute the words "Local Government and Public Health."
This is only a technical amendment.
Amendment agreed to.
Section 10 as amended agreed to.
SCHEDULE.
I propose amendment 7.
On page 4, in the portion of the Schedule relating to "No. 19 of 1924," to delete in the third column the word "section" and substitute the words "sections 5 and."
Amendment agreed to.
Schedule as amended agreed to.
The Title put and agreed to.
The Dáil went out of Committee.
Bill ordered to be reported.
FOURTH AND FIFTH STAGES.
If the House has not any objection I would prefer to take the other Stages of the Bill now. We are anxious that this Bill should become law at the earliest possible moment. With the amount of legislation that the Government has on hands if the further Stages of this Bill are not expedited there will be inevitable delay.
I must object to the taking of the remaining Stages now in fairness to the class of persons whom we have asked the Parliamentary Secretary to take into consideration to-day. I think he ought to look further into the question that has been raised with a view to seeing whether he might not in some way modify his attitude between now and the Report Stage. He is making a big and very unfair discrimination as between different classes of the community.
If there is any objection we cannot take the Report Stage now. In reply to Deputy Mulcahy I want to say that we have looked into all the aspects of the Bill and we have been as generous to all the interests affected by the Old Age Pensions Acts as we could possibly be.
Remaining Stages fixed for Tuesday, 14th June.