Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 23 Apr 1941

Vol. 82 No. 12

Committee on Finance. - Vote 27—Widows' and Orphans' Pensions.

Minister for Local Government and Public Health (Mr. Ruttledge)

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, 1942, chun íocaíctha leis an gCuntas Suncála Pinsean (Achtanna um Pinsin do Bhaintreacha agus do Dhílleachtaithe, 1935 go 1940 (Uimh. 29 de 1935, Alt 42 (2); Uimh. 11 de 1937, Alt 21; agus Uimh. 33 de 1940) ).

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 the 31st day of March, 1942, for payment to the Pensions Investment Account (Widows' and Orphans' Pensions Acts, 1935 to 1940 (No. 29 of 1935, Section 42 (2); No. 11 of 1937, Section 21; and No. 33 of 1940) ).

Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Local Government and Public Health (Dr. Ward)

The sum now asked for is to complete the annual amount of £450,000 in respect of the year ending 31st March, 1942. The Widows' and Orphans' Pensions Acts provide that in respect of the year ended 31st March, 1938, and of each of the next seven succeeding years, there shall be paid into the Pensions Investment Account out of moneys provided by the Oireachtas the annual sum of £450,000, and thereafter such sums as the Oireachtas may determine. 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 a period of years in equal annual instalments, in order to avoid undesirable increases annually in the amounts required to be voted by the Oireachtas. The excess income in the earlier years is invested, and held to make good the deficiency in income which will emerge in later years.

The total number of claims for contributory and non-contributory pensions which have been received is 55,955. Out of this number, pensions have been awarded in 48,151 cases, pensions were refused in 5,951 cases, claims were withdrawn or deemed to be withdrawn in 935 cases and there are 918 claims under consideration. 13,320 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 6,507. Out of the remaining 6,813 cases contributory pensions were awarded in 6,382 cases and there are 385 cases under consideration. Forty-six claims were withdrawn.

42,635 claims for non-contributory pensions have been received, to which should be added the 6,507 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 49,142 cases, non-contributory pensions have been awarded in 41,769 cases; pensions were refused in 5,951 cases, 889 claims were withdrawn or deemed withdrawn, and there are 533 claims under examination. Appeals to referees against decision that pensions were not payable or were payable at reduced rates have been received in 8,316 cases. The appeals have been decided in 8,133 cases and there are still 183 cases awaiting decision.

There were in course of payment at the end of February, 1941, 5,960 contributory pensions at a weekly cost of £4,160 13s. 6d., and 28,733 non-contributory pensions at a weekly cost of £8,552 16s., a total of 34,693 pensions amounting to £12,713 9s. 6d. per week. These represent payments in respect of 33,446 widows, 21,645 dependent children of widows, and 1,772 orphans. The corresponding figures at the end of February, 1940, were 4,669 contributory pensions at a weekly cost of £3,295 5s., and 29,199 non-contributory pensions at a weekly cost of £8,720 11s. 6d., a total of 33,868 pensions amounting to £12,015 16s. 6d. per week in respect of 32,727 widows, 21,320 dependent children of widows, and 1,624 orphans. In the 12 months ended 28th February, 1941, the number of beneficiaries has increased by 1,192 or approximately 2.14 per cent. and the weekly payments by £697 13s. per week or approximately 5.8 per cent.

Mr. Hurley

I wish to move the motion: "That the Estimate be referred back for reconsideration", standing in the names of Deputies Norton and Keyes. I wish to say at the outset that this question of making some provision for the widows and orphans is one that has agitated this Party since the establishment of the State. We tried by every persuasive means, inside the House and outside the House, to get some kind of provision made. Finally, in 1934 I think it was, we succeeded in doing so. The amounts of pension payments that were then fixed are still the same. The increase which has since taken place in the cost of living and the consequent decrease in the purchasing power of the amount of pension awarded is something which I should like to stress. Every member of the House has from time to time had the experience of witnessing the tragedy caused by the loss of the head of the family, the bread-winner, and the helplessness of those left behind, the widow and orphans. In many cases that tragedy is increased by the fact that those left behind are practically in destitution. There are various reasons for that. In some cases there are large families and no provision could be made for the future. There are other cases, and I think in the greater number of them, especially within recent years, the reason for that want of provision was the unemployment of the head of the family while he was alive.

I must say that the administration of the Widows' and Orphans' Pensions Act, from my experience of it at the head office, is very sympathetic. I should like to pay that tribute to the officials there. I have not the same to say with regard to the investigation of claims down the country. There is a pretty rigorous means test imposed in connection with the paying out of State money under various social services at the present time, but I think the means test in respect to widows and orphans is enforced in even a more rigorous fashion. I, and I am sure other Deputies, have had experience of the bullying attitude adopted by some investigation officers. I should like to emphasise that the investigation of means by those officers should be carried out in a humane manner.

The majority of cases, when closely investigated by the officers, are found to be genuine. I suggest that the different officers should not approach the investigation of claims with a suspicious mind, with the feeling that there is something not being disclosed, and that, by adopting a kind of inquisitorial manner, they will bring it to light. I do not think that the Minister or the Department would stand for that sort of thing. It is one of the most important aspects in connection with the administration of the Widows' and Orphans' Pensions Acts, because it involves a lot of hardship on unfortunate people. Very often there is delay occasioned before payment is made, and that has caused much hardship to people who are sadly in need of financial assistance. In many cases it is an undue delay, and the widows and orphans have to suffer; they must accept the charity of friends or find some other means of living until they get the meagre amount that is allowed to them. The pensions which are granted to widows and orphans on the non-contributory side are so meagre that I believe I would be quite right in describing them as scandalous. The widows on the non-contributory side form the bigger proportion of those relieved under this scheme. I could not catch very clearly the figures mentioned by the Parliamentary Secretary, but I gathered that 5,960 cases came under the contributory heading, and about 28,733 cases under the non-contributory heading. The 28,733 persons assisted under this scheme receive 5/- a week. What any woman, even the most careful and saving person, could do at the present time on 5/- a week is a mystery to me. I may be told that the total amount is very large, and that this is only one of several social services.

I think the essence of any social service should be the humane outlook of those administering it. A social service should be such as to maintain the recipient, as was laid down in some definition or other, in some kind of frugal comfort. It cannot, by any stretch of the imagination, be contended that 5/- a week is sufficient to give frugal comfort to a widow. I have to complain of the reluctance of the Government to increase the amount allotted under the non-contributory scheme. To them such a suggestion would seem to be distasteful. In my opinion, the amount allotted should bear some relation to the cost of living. I do not think the Parliamentary Secretary could disagree with that argument. There is no relation between the 5/- a week allowed to a widow and what it would cost to keep her in a public institution, even in a jail, or any other institution subsidised by the State. The amounts allowed under the contributory scheme, which are something better than those allowed under the non-contributory scheme, are still not sufficient to meet the needs of a widow and her family. In most cases, what is granted has to be supplemented from home assistance funds. I have already complained about that way of doing business. If the State takes on itself the responsibility of providing for social services, the provision should at least be adequate, and not have to be supplemented from other sources.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy is aware that the amounts are fixed by statute.

Mr. Hurley

I am aware of that, but I am trying to impress on the Parliamentary Secretary the desirability of making more adequate provision.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That is outside the scope of this Estimate.

Mr. Hurley

Perhaps he could do it by means of an Emergency Order?

Mr. Davin

I am sure the Parliamentary Secretary would like to get hold of an Emergency Powers Order for many things.

Mr. Hurley

I suggest that the need in this case is so great that an Emergency Powers Order should be availed of. Emergency powers have been utilised for far less worthy objects, and probably objects of which many Deputies would not approve. For these reasons I invite a frank answer from the Parliamentary Secretary.

Mr. Murphy

The object of this Vote is one that is very dear to us on this side of the House and, in saying that, I do not wish to cast any reflection on Deputies in other Parties. As far back as 1929 we spent some hours discussing this Estimate and, if I remember aright, the Parliamentary Secretary, who is now in charge of this Estimate, was present for part of the debate. We have seen this scheme in operation, and even if it has defects, the fact that the framework has been provided should be an incentive for an examination, to see how far we can make it worthy of the ideals that animated us when it was discussed originally. We are all ready, both here and elsewhere, to air our grievances, and perhaps sometimes we take more than passing pleasure in criticising a Department that we consider has been harsh or slothful in its administration, but it is a very special pleasure to me, particularly, to say that I regard this Department in its administration as being very efficiently run. Information can be got quickly, one always gets a generous measure of courtesy, and receives prompt replies to correspondence. That makes relations with the Department very pleasant. If we hear of cases that are unsympathetically approached, then there are other instances where that rather harsh feature is modified very considerably by the sympathetic approach of other officials. I am quite sure Deputy Hurley has had the experience that others have had, that the final word of the referees in the matter of appeals lodged by claimants is on the whole fair and satisfactory. Where there is some measure of doubt as to the means or alleged means in many cases of persons who appeal, I can say that the benefit of the doubt is always given to the claimants.

I am very glad to be able to say that, and to pay my tribute to what I regard as a Department that is run in a very efficient manner. I take this opportunity to suggest to the Parliamentary Secretary that the question of increased contributions for widows' and orphans' pensions might be examined, and to state that I am prepared to stand for an increase of contributions for the purpose of supplementing the allowances paid to persons now in receipt of non-contributory pensions. In making that suggestion I feel that it is incumbent to suggest ways and means. I am prepared to take personal responsibility for suggesting increased contributions to meet what I think is a very worthy object and one that should receive early consideration.

In that connection I suggest to the Parliamentary Secretary that an opportunity might present itself for doing that by bringing classes into this type of insurance not yet within the limitations of income. The scheme might be varied to permit of a large number of extra people being brought in to assist the fund which would to some extent be used for the object I mention. I offer that suggestion to the Parliaments mentary Secretary because, while it is quite easy to make a case for the more liberal treatment of widows the question of ways and means will always arise. It will enable the Parliamentary Secretary to consider the matter and to bring it to the attention of the Department concerned, with a view to letting the House have the benefit of its views, if not when concluding on this Estimate, at some later date.

Mr. Linehan

Without asking for legislation or amending the Act I suggest to the Parliamentary Secretary that what is really wanted is an examination as to how the scheme is operating. I think he will admit the anomalies which exist between contributory and non-contributory pensions, which are entirely out of proportion. Take, as an example, that the widow of an insured contributor gets a higher rate of benefit, possibly rightly, so that it could be regarded there as a sort of life insurance. Then take the position where a labourer who was contributing dies, and whose widow is the owner of a small farm in her own right. She was entitled to the pension under the contributory scheme but her neighbour, the widow of a shoemaker, of a carpenter or a workman, who was his own master and had his own little business, who left a family badly off, would not be entitled without an amendment of the Act. As the scheme has now been in operation for some years there should be an examination of its working to see how it affects different classes of people. I ask the Parliamentary Secretary to have it investigated to see what benefits have accrued to the people I refer to. If a person who is in possession of a small farm in her own right can draw the maximum amount, while the widow of a tradesman who left a family does not benefit under the Act obviously a definite hardship arises. I know that one man paid into the fund, and that the other did not, but should that be the test for the granting of a widow's and orphan's pension?

The main object was to relieve destitution and the operation of the non-contributory scheme is not doing anything towards that end. I am sure the Parliamentary Secretary will agree that if the whole question was examined a scheme could be arranged under which it would be possible to have a better balanced fund than is the case at present. I do not think it would be any hardship, or that there would be any great strain on the revenue, if a little more was paid to those who were not contributing to the fund. If the object was to give widows some chance of rearing young families and relieving destitution, the whole question should be re-examined in the light of what is now happening. I am sure the Parliamentary Secretary will agree that there is a case for paying non-contributory pensions at the same rate as is paid under the contributory scheme.

Dr. Ward

Again, most of the discussion has been related to the desirability of amending the law. The rates of contribution are fixed by law and cannot be altered by administrative action. I was glad to hear Deputies who took part in the debate paying tribute to the sympathetic manner in which the Widows' and Orphans' Pensions Acts are administered. It is refreshing to hear that type of debate, and I believe there is no Department of State more deserving of such a tribute than the national health insurance and widows' and orphans' pensions section of local government. As Deputy Murphy will remember, I have been interested in this question of widows' and orphans' pensions for a very long period, and, consequently, I am perhaps a little more critical of the administration of these social services than one who might not have been so intimately concerned with it over a long period. I must say that I have always found, in my own relationship with them, the widows' and orphans' pensions and national health insurance sections most sympathetic to the claimants. Complaint was made here to-day about the bullying attitude of certain investigation officers. I am rather surprised to hear that and I believe it is not general.

Mr. Murphy

It is not.

Dr. Ward

There are apparently isolated incidents of these investigation officers failing to rise to the full height of their responsibility. It is very regrettable, but I remind Deputies that we in our Department have no control whatever over the investigation officers. If, however, complaints on the lines mentioned, of a bullying attitude on the part of investigation officers, are forwarded to our Department, we will certainly take steps to ensure that the responsible Department will have them fully investigated. It would be an intolerable state of affairs that any servant of the State should bully these unfortunate people in the manner which has been described. I do not think that such an officer, if the complaint were brought home to him, would be retained in the service of the State.

Deputy Linehan refers to the anomalies such as that of the widow of an insured person who appears to get away with a high pension, while her neighbour, in almost similar circumstances, gets only a 5/- pension. I think the soundness of that can scarcely be questioned. If the bread-winner contributed out of his earnings during his life to making provision for his widow and children in the event of his death, I think that widow is entitled to a higher degree of protection than the State should be called upon to afford to people who made no such provision. In the case of the non-contributory pensions, the State, of course, bears the whole cost. It is nice to advocate an increase, and everybody, I am sure, will agree that 5/- per week in rural Ireland as a non-contributory pension is a very small amount. We would all like to see it much higher, but it becomes a question of the amount of money that can be made available for this purpose, and, in that regard, it is well to remember that it is only within comparatively recent years that even 5/- a week has been made available, and it is, at any rate, substantially better than if nothing at all were made available.

I do not think the money for increases can be found at present. In the present emergency, with the huge and exceptional impositions in the way of taxation arising out of the emergency, I do not think we could at all contemplate a substantial increase in the benefits under the Widows' and Orphans' Pensions Acts. If we do it in the case of widows and orphans, we would logically have to follow the same line of reasoning in relation to most of our social services. If we were to increase unemployment insurance, unemployment assistance, national health insurance, old age pensions, widows' and orphans' pensions and home assistance, and to keep them all in step, it certainly would mean an enormous additional burden on the taxpayers. Whether that enormous burden ought to be undertaken in normal times is a question that might well be debated, but I do think that, in present circumstances, it could not be contemplated.

Deputy Murphy makes the rather novel suggestion that in order to increase the amount available for non-contributory pensions, we might increase the contributions of the contributory class. I confess that it is a solution to which I have never given any thought. It is a rather novel idea, but, at first glance, I should say that the people who would be called upon to make the contribution would scarcely take very kindly to the scheme. They and their representatives generally claim that the benefits available to their own dependents are scarcely sufficient. If they were called on to give an increased contribution, I should say that they would probably put forward a demand for an increase in the benefits available to them under the Acts, but I would be reluctant to believe that they would come forward with any enthusiasm to pay increased contributions in order to provide additional pensions for the non-contributory class. However, Deputy Murphy is probably in more intimate touch with that particular section at the moment than I am. It raises an interesting line of thought, at any rate, which can be pursued until we find what degree of encouragement might be got in the finding of a solution along those lines. I should be surprised if we found a great volume of support for such a solution.

Mr. Linehan

I quite agree with the Parliamentary Secretary's point that a person who pays contributions is providing for his widow and children, but he will agree that there are thousands of people in the country in the position to which I have referred, that is, small tradesmen who are their own employers. Could the Parliamentary Secretary visualise a scheme whereby these people would be entitled to stamp national health insurance cards and so give them an opportunity of ensuring something for their dependents?

Dr. Ward

As voluntary contributors?

Mr. Linehan

Yes.

Dr. Ward

I shall have that examined.

Mr. Davin

Might I ask whether there is any high percentage of cases of pension payments being reduced or suspended as a result of anonymous communications?

Dr. Ward

I would not say so.

Mr. Davin

The reason I ask is that I know one case, but I am not sure whether it arose from an anonymous letter sent direct to the Parliamentary Secretary's Department, or to the Revenue office.

Dr. Ward

There would not be very much attention paid in my Department to anonymous communications.

Mr. Davin

I am very glad to hear that.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

Vote put and agreed to.