Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 7 Apr 1938

Vol. 70 No. 13

Public Business. - Vote 29—Widows' and Orphans' Pensions.

I move:—

Go ndeontar suim ná raghaidh thar £300,000 chun slánuithe na suime is gá chun íoctha an Mhuirir a thiocfaidh chun bheith iníoctha i rith na bliana dar críoch an 31adh lá de Mhárta, 1939, chun íocaíochta leis an gCuntas Suncála Pinsean (Achtanna um Pinsin do Bhaintreacha agus do Dhílleachtaithe, 1935 go 1937 (Uimh. 29 de 1935, Alt 42 (2) agus Uimh. 11 de 1937, Alt 21)).

That a sum not exceeding £300,000 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1939, for payment to the Pensions Investment Account (Widows' and Orphans' Pensions Acts, 1935 to 1937 (No. 29 of 1935, Section 42 (2) and No. 11 of 1937, Section 21)).

The sum now asked for is to complete the annual sum of £450,000 which is required to be paid into the Pensions Investment Account under Section 42 of the Widows' and Orphans' Pensions Act, 1935, as amended by Section 21 of the Widows' and Orphans' Pensions Act, 1937. The Acts provide that in the year 1937-38 and in each of the next seven succeeding years a sum of £450,000 shall be paid into the account out of moneys provided by the Oireachtas. The finance of the scheme is based on the assumption that in the early years the income to the Widows' and Orphans' Pensions Fund would be more than sufficient to meet the pension payments, but that in the later years this position would be reversed and that a point would be reached when the normal income to the fund would be insufficient to meet the outgoings. For this reason it was considered prudent to arrange that the State subvention required to supplement the contributions of employers and employed persons should be distributed over periods of ten years in equal annual instalments in order to avoid undesirable increases in the annual amounts required to be voted by the Oireachtas. The intention is that the excess income in the earlier years should be invested and held to make good the deficiency in income which will emerge in later years. The amount of £450,000 accordingly represents an equalising payment up to and including the financial year 1944-1945, after which the position will be subject to review.

The Act of 1937 considerably extended the scope of the non-contributory scheme of pensions which as from the 2nd July, 1937, are payable in respect of all necessitous widows (except those under 55 with no dependent children) and all necessitous orphans. Further, in ascertaining the financial resources of a claimant to a non-contributory pension, that is to say, in applying the "means test" certain relaxations of the conditions laid down in the 1935 Act were made.

The result of the Amending Act of 1937 was to increase considerably the number of new claims for non-contributory pensions. In addition, there was a large number of cases where claims under the 1935 Act had been rejected, or a reduced rate of pension had been awarded, or where the pension had terminated under the provisions of that Act. It was necessary to re-examine all those cases in the light of the provisions of the 1937 Act. A total of 16,322 claims were re-examined, made up as follows:— 12,423 cases in which pension was refused under the 1935 Act; 3,414 cases where reduced pensions had been granted; 485 cases where a pension had been awarded but had been terminated.

The following is a statement as at the 11th March of the number of claims received, pensions awarded and pensions refused. The total number of claims for contributory and non-contributory pensions which have been received is 40,355. Out of this number, pensions have been awarded in 32,673 cases, pensions were refused in 5,643 cases, claims were withdrawn or deemed to be withdrawn in 1,015 cases and there are 1,024 cases under consideration.

Contributory pensions.—4,760 claims for contributory pensions have been received. Many of these claims were made in respect of persons who were not insured under the Widows' and Orphans' Pensions Acts, and after being formally rejected under the contributory provisions they were transferred to the non-contributory class. In addition, there was a number of cases where the qualifying conditions for the payment of a contributory pension were not satisfied and these also were treated as claims to non-contributory pensions. The total number of cases transferred from the contributory to the non-contributory class was 2,114. Out of the remaining 2,646 cases contributory pensions were awarded in 2,274 cases and there are 349 cases under consideration. Twenty-three claims were withdrawn.

Non-contributory pensions.—35,595 claims for non-contributory pensions have been received, to which should be added the 2,114 claims for contributory pensions, which were either not properly within the contributory class, or which failed to satisfy the qualifying conditions for the grant of contributory pensions. Out of these 37,709 cases, non-contributory pensions have been awarded in 30,399 cases; pensions were refused in 5,643 cases; 992 claims were withdrawn or deemed to be withdrawn and there are 675 claims under examination.

Appeals to referees against decisions that pensions were not payable, or were payable at reduced rates have been received in 5,840 cases. The appeals have been decided in 4,887 cases and there were still 953 cases awaiting decision on 11th March. There were in course of payment at the end of February, 2,171 contributory pensions at a weekly cost of £1,615 2s. 6d. and 27,193 non-contributory pensions at a weekly cost of £8,250 12s., a total of 29,364 pensions amounting to £9,865 14s. 6d. per week. These represent payments in respect of 28,586 widows, 20,085 dependent children of widows and 1,186 orphans.

I am alive to the very wide scope of this Vote and the benefits that are derived from it, but I think that there is evidence that in its administration, inspections and subsequent decisions are tightened up very considerably with regard to widows. One case that has come under my notice concerns a widow residing in Whitegate, a seaside village in County Cork, and her means were just below the statutory limit, but some relatives made her a present of either £1 or £2 and that brought her above the statutory limit. As a result of having received that present, she lost her widow's pension, although the present could not be deemed an annual payment by any means. It was a present given her by persons who wished her well. In such circumstances, might I suggest to the Minister, the inspectors should have regard to the surrounding circumstances, and should have looked upon this present in the spirit in which it was given. At best, it was a borderline case, and surely it was a tremendous hardship on that poor widow to deprive her of her statutory rights. I want specially to draw the Minister's attention to cases of widows and orphans of British ex-Servicemen who would not be entitled to any widow's pension from the British military pension authorities. These people were accustomed to getting an allowance from a fund in England called the Patriotic Fund Corporation, but this allowance had to cease when the widows' and orphans' pensions system was inaugurated. At the same time, I am sure that the fund would be willing to make a special allowance over and above what these people would be getting through their statutory rights, if the Minister could see his way to arrange some system by which the allowance could be supplemented.

These allowances are given for special purposes to people who are looked upon as deserving of them. It would be hard if these people, while enjoying statutory rights, had to forego them and be deprived of any extra remuneration which they could gain owing to the activities of their husbands. I respectfully ask the Minister to devise some scheme whereby these allowances can be paid to such people in addition to the ordinary allowances to which they are entitled which, under present circumstances, are small enough.

I should like to put before the Minister the case of an old lady residing in a country district who was in receipt of a widow's pension. She was paid 7/6 a week while residing in the country, but it was found that that was a mistake, and that the allowance should be 5/- in the country and 7/6 in a town. When the officials found out their mistake, instead of meeting the case of that poor woman by giving her the smaller sum, they cancelled the pension for 14 weeks. That was a great hardship for her. She then went to live in a town and was entitled to 7/6, but found that she had to be a resident there for 12 months before she could draw the pension. I noticed in the Press recently that it was expected there would be a surplus this year of £400,000 over the Budget estimate.

Did you see the exact opposite in another paper?

The Deputy must wait until he hears the Minister for Finance on that.

The point I want to make is that if such is the case the Minister might see his way to increase the amount of pensions payable to widows and orphans as, in my view, the present amounts are very inadequate.

Deirtear nach bhfuil beannacht ar bith níos mó ná beannacht baintrighe agus dílleachtaithe agus, aríst ar ais, nach bhfuil mallacht ar bith is measa ná mallacht baintrighe agus dílleachtaithe. Nuair a rinneadh an dligheadh seo i dtosach, ní raibh baintreach ná dílleachta sa tír nach dtug a bheannacht dó ach, tar éis tamaill, d'eirigh go leor leor acu as na beannachtaí mar sé malairt an ruda a raibh súil acu leis a fuair siad. An rud beag maoine bhí acu, agus isé an beagán de bhí ag a mbunáite, ceapadh go leor dó i riocht is nach bhfuair go leor acu pinsean ar bith agus gur gearradh bunáite na coda eile anuas ar ríbheagán.

Tá fhios agam cás amháin a bhfuil deich nó dó dhéag d'acraí acu—sliabh a bhí ann a thugadar féin 'un míongais agus is rí-dhona an talamh é. Ceapadh don áit sin go ndearnadh dhá sgór punt bantáiste as sa mbliain, mar sin cuireadh an bhean ar léithi é agus a muirighin dílleachtaithe as an bpinsean. Ar ndóigh, ní fíor go ndearnadh an méid sin airgid as ná a dheichiú cuid sin. Dá mb'fhíor go ndéanfaí dhá fhichead punt as gabhaltas beag mar sin, ní bheadh aon chall a bheith ag athrú muirighineacha suas go Condae na Midhe agus a leithide d'áit agus a' cailleadh an oiread seo airgid ortha. Tá fhios agam baintreach eile a bhfuil triúr inghean aici agus mac; níl mé cinnte an bó nó dhá bhó atá aici agus fuair sí pinsean mór millteach—aon scilling amháin sa tseachtain. Tá na scórtha dá leithidí seo sa tír.

Cuireann cuid acu seo appeal isteach agus deirtear go dtríáileann referee é. Níl fhios ag duine ar bith cé hé an referee, má tá a leithide ann chor ar bith, nó má tá na sgórtha acu ann. Nuair a chuireas na daoine seo a chuireas appeal isteach sgéala chugamsa nó chuig mo leithide agus fhiafruighmuid cé hé an referee, níl duine ar bith i ndon innseacht dúinn cé hé féin. Tá mise a cheapadh gur dalladh mullóg atá ghá chur ar na daoine acu. Cúirt ar bith faoi'n domhan a ngabhfa tú, nuair cuirtear appeal isteach óna daoine is árd-nósaighe go dtí na daoine is ísle, beidh fhios cé hiad na breitheamhain. Cuir i gcás, i gcúis pinsean na seandaoine, tá fhios agat cé chuige a ngabhfaidh tú, cé hiad na hoifigigh atá dhá thríáil agus beidh duine i ndon rud eicínt a dhéanamh sa gcúis dona seandaoine, ach i gcúis na mbaintreacha agus na ndílleachlaithe, níl duine i ndon tada a dhéanamh.

Anois, is rí-olc agus ámhailleach bheith anuas ar na boicht cho mór sin agus go mór mór ar na fíor-bhoicht, na baintreacha agus na dílleachtaithe. Ní raibh rud ar bith dá bharr ag duine ar bith a bhí ariamh. Tá mé cinnte tar éis an méid seo a rá leis an Aire go n-athrócha sé an scéim agus go bhfeice sé go bhfuighe siad an rud atá ag dul dóibh dlisteanach—an ceart. Ní fhéadfaidh aon duine a rá gur iarr mise aon rud ariamh sa Teach seo ach an rud a bhí dlisteanach agus ceart agus tá mé cinnte go dtiubhraidh an tAire sin uaidh mar sé mo bharamhail nach bhfuil sé go hole.

Tá sean-ráidht ann agus luigheann sé leis na cásannaí seo: "Oineach Uí Bhriain agus a dhá shúil ina dhiaidh"—sin an dligheadh atá dhá chaitheamh leis na baintreacha agus na dílleachtaithe.

Certain information has come to my notice regarding the calculation of means of applicants for pensions. I think the method of calculation is manifestly unfair. I am sure the Minister must have received many complaints on the same lines, and if they are as well founded as the complaints I have had they, at least, call for his attention. It was pointed out to me that in calculating a widow's means the officers took into consideration such things as awards made by the courts in actions, arising out of accidents, where widows lost their husbands. The officers calculated that the money brought in a certain rate of interest, but I believe money could not earn such a rate in Great Britain or Ireland. Another case was brought to my notice recently in which awards were made to a widow and to an orphan. The money for the child was invested by the court and it was calculated that it earned 3 per cent, but the officer who decided the case calculated that it earned 5 per cent. I say that that was manifestly unfair, and the Minister should see that things are not done in that way. If money is invested by the court it should be easy to ascertain the interest earned on it. In this case the woman was deprived of a pension to which, in my opinion, she was entitled, because the interest was calculated at a rate that did not exist. In addition a large portion of the award had been spent, and the applicant had nothing to live on, in the meantime.

There is a lot to be said for the point made by Deputy Mongan with regard to the deciding officer. If I could walk into a deciding officer, in a case in which there had been an improper calculation of means, as there has been in this case, I could possibly have the matter rectified. That can be done under the Old Age Pensions Act. I have gone to the deciding officers under that Act on various occasions and found them to be commonsense people, but under this Act you do not know where to go. I do not know what deciding officer I can go before, and say that a mistake has been made in some particular case. As I have said, there is a great deal to be said for the point of view put forward by Deputy Mongan, and if what he has urged would not interfere too much with the ordinary administration of the Act, I think it should be done.

I have nothing to say against the administration of this Act in general, except on the question of the calculation of means. I raised this question last year. I would like if the Minister would take this question in hands himself. In the case of many of the women concerned, there is no doubt that what is being done is unjust. Deputy Brennan quoted a case in which the conduct of the officer concerned was certainly very high-handed and unjust. Because the woman in that case had been awarded a sum of money the official rushed to the conclusion that she was drawing 5 per cent. on it. If that man knew anything at all about securities he would know that, in the case of trustee securities, you cannot get anything like 5 per cent. In my post last evening I got further particulars of a case that has been in my hands for some time. If I had known that this Vote was coming on to-day I would have all the documents here. This is the case of a widow who was getting 6/- for herself and the child in the form of home assistance. She then applied for a pension, thinking that she would be better on it. I cannot recall at the moment what sum was awarded to her originally as a pension, but I drafted an appeal for her and sent it to the referee.

Her case was reinvestigated, and all the documents came back to me last evening. In the original award I remember they found that she had an income of something like £4 from the sale of cigarettes and the use of a garden. The case was reviewed under the instructions of the referee, and the finding now is that her income from the sale of cigarettes is £3 10s., while her supposed benefits from cattle, garden and house are estimated to be worth £14 10s. Remember, this is a woman on behalf of whom I lodged an appeal. In the first instance her case was fully investigated by an inspector of the board of health. He was a local man who knew everything about her, and on his report she was given for her child and herself 6/- as home assistance. Members of the House who are also members of county councils are aware that boards of health are only given a limited sum of money by the county councils for home assistance payments. The result is that all applications for home assistance are subjected to very strict examination. I had a case recently myself before the Donegal Board of Health, and it was only after a desperate struggle that I was able to get 2/- a week for a poor woman. But in the case that I have been dealing with the woman and her child were getting 6/- home assistance. As well as I remember, the amount of pension awarded to her originally was 6/- When the child became of age about last July the amount was cut down to 2/-. At the time that I lodged the appeal an official had found that she had £4 from the sale of cigarettes and from the use of a garden, but following the appeal her means were calculated at £17. A sum of £3 10s. was put down as regards the sale of cigarettes, and it was calculated that her benefits from the use of cattle and a garden amounted to £14 10s. I do not know where the official got those figures.

What I imagine happened was that the official put down as means against the mother the few pounds that her son has been trying to make on cattle. I would ask the Minister to get a new schedule drafted to this Act. As every Deputy knows, a garden of a house is never calculated as means under the Old Age Pensions Act, but under this Act I have seen a case where an apple tree, stuck at the end of a cottage garden, was calculated to be of so much value. Under the Old Age Pensions Act, if a man has a horse, it is not calculated as means. If a man has a few acres of land he must have a horse, and very often the horse is a liability instead of being an asset. It is really farcical to bring in a cottage for which a widow is paying rent, just because there are a few yards of a garden attached to it, and calculate that as means under this Act. My own opinion is that if excise officers were conducting these investigations you would not have that kind of thing going on. What is happening is that you have men going around who have had no previous experience of this kind of work. If they had any experience of calculating means they would not estimate as happened in the cases referred to by Deputy Brennan, that money awarded in an accident case was earning 5 per cent. Why, the very most that you can get in trustee securities is 2 or 2½ per cent. I repeat that the administration of this Act is unjust and unfair. Why should a house and a plot be calculated as means? The widow has got to live somewhere. Of course she could get over all this worry and trouble by going into the county home. No charge will be made there for a house or for food. But because she has a little cottage and a garden she is told that she is deriving so much benefit from them, and all that is taken into account when calculating her means for a pension. It is about time that all that kind of thing was cut out. This House passed this Widows' and Orphans' Pensions Act to help a struggling class, and it was because the House felt that they were a struggling class that it enacted the measure. The maximum payable in the case of non-contributory pensions is very small. I hope the Minister will do something to meet the points that we have brought to his notice. If the State cannot do anything better than that, I should much prefer that they not do anything at all. I urge the Minister to reconsider this question of the calculation of the means at once and to send instructions as soon as he can draw up his scheme.

The Minister stated that he welcomed criticism on this Estimate. I brought up an important case on the Estimate last year. It was the case of a poor man who was suffering from mental trouble. He escaped at night from the institution in which he was and he was seen about 100 yards from the sea. The Department, owing to the absence of a certificate of death, declined to make this poor man's widow any allowance under the Act. The case did not arise through any fault of the institution or of the poor man himself. Owing to the interpretation of the Act, the Department was unable to allow this poor woman to receive what she was entitled to receive. It was common knowledge, and it was clear from the report of the Guards and of the facts of the case, that this poor man committed suicide. Unfortunately, the body could not be found. His seven children are in receipt of home assistance and the Department refuses to award any pension.

There is another matter about which there are many complaints in my constituency—the unnecessary delay from the time the person makes application for a pension until the pension, however small, is awarded. In many cases there are over four months' delay. I believe that is too long. I could cite a couple of cases which have been under the Department's consideration since last December. During that period, the people have been in receipt of home assistance. If the Minister can do anything in the case I mentioned, I should be glad if he would do it. If he requires any evidence from the Guards or any medical or local evidence, he can be supplied with it because it is believed locally that this poor man committed suicide. Owing to the way the Act is interpreted, the Minister has not been in a position to award a pension. I hope that some arrangement will be adopted by which death can be assumed in such cases and pensions made payable.

I desire to refer to the great delay in dealing with these claims for pension. In particular cases, delay may be necessary but three or four months' delay should not be necessary in any case. This delay is a source of great hardship to the people and it creates a great deal of trouble. I referred to another matter the other day which, I hope, the Minister will try to remedy—that is, the delay in the case of persons who are receiving widows' pensions, and who come to the age of 70, in awarding old age pensions. These people have to wait from five to seven months before they get the old age pension. It would save trouble and it would save the time of officials if some arrangement could be made whereby these people would be transferred from the widows' pensions list to the old age pensions list. That is a matter the Minister ought to deal with because I do not think he can deny that six months is the shortest interval between the time the widow's pension is stopped and the time the old age pension is paid. I should like the Minister to consider that matter and have it attended to.

The matter which I propose to raise will not be raised in any critical spirit. Members of my profession in the country are frequently asked for assistance in procuring old age pensions and widows' and orphans' pensions. I have found that it is absolutely impossible to explain to the claimants, or to understand, the basis of the means test. I do not know how the test is actually worked or what the system is on which particular items are valued. Cases are frequently met in which there is a considerable discrepancy between the pensions of two widows with the same number of children and, so far as persons with good knowledge can judge, in the same position of life. In some cases, there seems to be no justification for the differentiation. That difference causes grievances and is a source of annoyance to the parties. I may be entirely wrong, but I think I am right in saying that nobody knows the basis of the means test. Outside the Minister, I do not think there is a member of the House who could tell us on what system or line of policy the means test is carried out. I got the impression that the means test depends very often on the particular investigation officer. One investigation officer may take a far more strict view of the regulation than another does. It would simplify matters for everybody and prevent a lot of criticism if the system or basis on which the means test is worked out were put down in black and white and if we were told how the value of an acre of land is assessed, how the value of 20 hens is arrived at and what the income from cash in bank amounting to £70 or £100 is assessed at.

We might also be told how the value of awards made under the Workmen's Compensation Act is arrived at. Sooner or later, that matter will have to be cleared up. The people are, I think, entitled to know from the Minister exactly how this means test is assessed and the impression should not be allowed to get abroad that the operation of the means test depends on the investigation officer. There is an impression at present that certain investigation officers take a more lenient view of small items than do other investigation officers. In the country areas, both in respect of old age pensions and widows' and orphans' pensions, the results seem to vary according to the particular investigation officer in the district, and you will hear people say, "It was not half so hard to get a pension when the last man was here; it is almost impossible to get anything out of the new man."

There is nothing in local or national administration less popular than a means test. Wherever you have a means test, you have trouble and criticism. No two Deputies will agree exactly as to how a means test should be applied. It is more than likely that no two officials would agree, either, if left to themselves. But the people who administer the old age pensions means test and the widows' and orphans' pensions means test are the same, and adopt the same basis. Therefore, there cannot be the difference that Deputy Linehan suggests.

Very often the difference would be between two investigation officers.

The instructions are the same in all cases, and the basis is laid down in the Schedule to the Act.

Dubhairt an Teachta O Mongáin nach raibh sé indon aon eolas d'fháil amach i dtaobh an referee. Is furus an t-eolas san d'fháil aon uair. Tagann Teachtaí isteach gach lá agus cuireann siad ceisteanna ar oifigeach mar gheall ar na sean-phinsin.

Táim sásta i dtaobh an sean-phinsean ach nílim sásta i dtaobh an phinsean eile.

Is féidir leis an Teachta teacht isteach aon uair agus an t-eolas d'fháil. Má labhrann sé leis na hoifigigh i nGaedhilg, mar a labhrann sé annso, b'fhéidir go bhfaigheadh sé an t-eolas.

I nGaedhilg a labhraim i gcomhnuidhe annso agus níl náire orm faoi.

Is fíor é sin.

Agus labhair mé i nGaedhilg sul a raibh aon airgead le fáil as.

Deputy Dowdall referred to the amount of the pension. Though I am not going to say that this is a poor country, it is not exactly one of the richest in the world. Therefore, we cannot perhaps compare ourselves favourably with other countries in the amount of the old age pension and the widows' and orphans' pension that we give. The amount is small admittedly, but, in proportion to our resources, it is not so bad. In any case, this widows' and orphans' pensions scheme is only a couple of years in existence. It is a new social service and did not exist here up to two years ago. If the present tendency of social legislation in all parts of the world continues to develop and progress in the way it is going at present, all these services are bound to progress, improve and increase. As time goes on, there will be demand after demand by individual Deputies and organisations, and the House, probably, as a whole will sooner or later decide that it is wise to increase this allowance.

Means tests are difficult things to administer. But if you compare the figures as a whole with the statements made here as to particular cases and how the means test was applied, the total figures would not seem to bear out these statements. Out of 26,507 non-contributory pensions in operation on the 20th February this year the net weekly means taken into account amounted only to £722. £722 spread over that number of cases would not bear out that the general administration of the means test was anything like the specific individual cases mentioned. There may be hardships in individual cases, but that sum of £722 for the total amount of means taken into account and deducted from pensions would not bear out that the specific cases mentioned here are the general rule. Deputy Brasier mentioned the case of the Royal Patriotic Fund. That body pays certain allowances to widows of ex-service men. There is an arrangement with our Department by which we inform that body of the amount, if they inquire, of pensions being granted to widows, so that the maximum amount that they can pay will be paid to the widows. We are in communication regularly with them on this matter.

On the subject of delays, again the statistics do not bear out the statement that the general delay is four or five months in granting widows' and orphans' pensions from the time the claim is made. Out of a total of 40,693 claims received to date, only 892 claims are undecided, and the great majority of the 892 were received in the last five or six weeks. An analysis of decisions given in the four weeks ended 23rd March last shows that the majority of claims are discharged within five to eight weeks from the date of receipt and over 70 per cent of claims are decided within three months of receipt. In connection with these non-contributory pensions a lot of facts must be tested. The birth and marriage of the claimant, the death of the husband, the birth of the children— all these things have to be certified and investigated, and they take time, but there is no undue delay. I do not think it could be done at any quicker rate.

Deputy Ryan, I think it was, stated that the regulations have been tightened up since the scheme first started. If he means by that that we have been more strict and given less to people, that is not correct. As a matter of fact, in the last year when the amending Act was put through there was an amendment brought in by me that a sum of £6 10s. per annum of voluntary payments of the type mentioned by Deputy Brasier should not be counted when calculating means. So that the statement cannot be quite accurate that £1 or £2, given voluntarily by somebody to a person who is just on the border line, would take the pension away from that person—not at least until the allowance of £6 10s. had been taken into account. The £6 10s. allowance is made in all cases as a result of the last amending Act; that is about 2/6 per week. The regulations have not been tightened up but, as a matter of fact, in the last 12 months they have been loosened.

Deputy Ryan made another point about widows attaining the age at which they are entitled to an old age pension and suggested that there should be some way of arranging that there would not be a long delay between the time the widows' and orphans' pensions ceased to be paid and the time when the old age pension was granted. As a matter of fact our officials and the old age pensions officials watch these cases carefully so as to avoid delay where possible, and some four months or so before the age of 70 is reached the widow is notified and advised to apply for an old age pension. In that case an effort is made to do whatever is necessary to secure the pension with all possible speed. Sometimes, however, these people themselves are responsible for the delay. They put off applying and do not make the application until they have reached 70 years of age. There is then an interval of some months between the date of reaching 70 years— when the widow's pension drops—and the payment of the old age pension. At any rate, so far as we in this Department are concerned, the officials see that steps are taken to advise the widows before they reach the age of 70 years that it would be wise for them to make early application for old age pensions.

Before you put the question, Sir, might I ask the Minister to take a few figures from me? The Minister appears to doubt some of the cases which have been made. The figures that I have here relate to a case which was decided, and are the deciding officer's own figures. I think it would be a pity to let this opportunity pass without giving the Minister a true picture of at least some of the things that are happening.

I do not say they do not happen, but they are not typical cases.

I am relying on the Minister's generosity to take the figures from me, because I think they will be an enlightenment to him as well as to the House. In this case, a woman lost her husband. She had one baby. Over two years ago she got an award of £150 in the court. A sum of £327 10s. was awarded to the minor. The woman had to come back and live with her father and mother and other members of the family, and the Minister's deciding officer calculated that her maintenance was worth £13 a year. As a matter of fact, the father should have been paid for keeping the woman and her child. This sum of £150, which was awarded practically two years ago, was calculated to bring her a return of £6 5s. per annum. She has not £80 at the moment, because she had to live on it. The child's portion was calculated to bring her in £15 2s. 6d., making a total of £34 7s. 6d. I am just giving those figures to the Minister. They are taken from the papers of his own deciding officer; they are not mine.

Vote put and agreed to.
Top
Share