Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 27 Jun 1946

Vol. 101 No. 19

Committee on Finance. - Vote 7—Old Age Pensions—(Resumed).

Mr. Keyes

I have been appealing to the Minister, in conjunction with other Deputies, for some amelioration of the application of the regulations governing the old age pensions code, having regard to the hardships of the times and to the fact that the regulations were framed at a time when money had a very much higher value. It is not possible on this Vote to discuss the question of increasing old age pensions, but at least we are entitled to suggest that the regulations in connection with the very small sum made available for old age pensioners should be applied in some less drastic manner by the pensions officers. With other Deputies I have to complain that there is no relaxation in this matter. Quite the contrary.

I ask the Minister whether or not there has been any circular issued by his Department to these pension officers indicating the mind of the Minister and the Department in this connection, instructing them to have regard to the hardships inflicted upon people who are condemned to live on a maximum pension of 10/- with the somewhat illusory bonus that was given through the Local Government Department after the imposition of a further means test. We know that pensions officers have been unduly rigorous in the application and interpretation of the regulations. They are dealing with a section of the community who, because of their age and peculiar circumstances, cannot be fully versed in the interpretation of regulations and are easily trapped into making statements against their best interests. In my opinion, it would be in the interests of equity and justice if, at least during the present period, the Minister were to instruct his pensions officers not to be unduly rigorous in the application of these cast-iron regulations.

I had a case quite recently of an old age pensioner in whose case the grant of pension was objected to by the pension officer. The pension was granted by the local committee, which is composed of citizens, acting without reward, who try to do their duty as between the State and the applicant. The pension officer seemed riled when that decision of the committee was upheld in the Department of Local Government and the award sustained. In less than 12 months he came back again and because the old age pensioner had got a few days' work in an agricultural industry where he used to work from time to time, he decided to rescind the pension. The old age pensions committee maintained that the transient benefit accruing to the old age pensioner was not sufficient to warrant interference with their previous decision, and the pension officer brought it again before the Minister for Local Government. I suggest that many of the applications and appeals coming before the Department of Local Government are caused by undue interference of pension officers and by vindictiveness in dealing with applicants. I think that is altogether against the spirit and the letter of the Act. I want to know if that is done on instructions from the Minister or is it due to lack of appreciation of the position on the part of the officers who are acting in the Minister's name throughout the country?

The regulations are very complex. The maximum income allowable is 16/- —comprising 10/- pension and 6/- private means. We frequently hear of the time when the Cosgrave Government were responsible for reducing the old age pension by 1/- and we hear whoops of praise of the Fianna Fáil Government who restored that 1/- but there has not been much comment, from one side or the other, on the fact that the income level has been reduced from £47 to £39, in other words from a total of approximately £1 to 16/-. When the 1/- was restored by Fianna Fáil, they did not make a corresponding restoration in this respect. Therefore, these people have been suffering grave hardship and a very large number of old age pensioners are not entitled to receive the maximum pension of 10/- a week.

Deputy Morrissey asked for returns of the number of people in receipt of the various scales of pension. These returns were given recently in the House. The figure in regard to those in receipt of maximum pension is much more important than the figure of those receiving a less amount because the rigorous test imposed means that the old age pensioner or blind pensioner who qualifies for a maximum pension must be absolutely without means above a 6/- level. I leave it to the imagination of Deputies to determine what 16/- a week is worth at the present time.

It is not my practice to complain against officials but I want to complain against the inquisition in the case of old and blind people and the discourtesy that is shown in many instances by the pensions officers. Applicants for such pensions are entitled to respect. They are the parents of this nation. Recently there were two cases in which I was interested. I had to inquire from the pensions officer about them only to find that they had been lying for 13 weeks unattended to. The pensions officer, without any apology, asked me if I would be good enough to call on one old age pensioner concerned and ask her to be in her home on a particular evening at a particular time when "his majesty" would call. His only explanation for the delay of 13 weeks in each case was that he was harassed in carrying out the functions of investigation officer for old age pensions, widows' pensions, unemployment assistance and had a few other jobs thrown in. Because of that, those people, who were down and out, and who looked for what this Parliament had given them, had to wait for 13 weeks before the inspector would call.

I did not feel like being a penny-boy for that gentleman. I reminded him that I was a Deputy representing my constituency. When he did call upon that old lady, he cut her 2/- in her pension on the ground that her husband was a docker. Her husband is 68 years of age and anybody knowing the conditions of dockers at Limerick will realise what he could earn at 68 years of age. I am glad that I was able to appeal to the humanity of the Local Government Department, who repudiated the action of that officer.

I want to ask the Minister, frankly, does he think it reasonable, having regard to all the circumstances, to the hardship of the regulations even at the time they were framed, and to the present value of money, that the same rigour—and increased rigour—should be used by these officers, in contra-distinction to the kindness shown by the Department of Local Government. Does the milk of human kindness not flow in the veins of these officers or have they been fed on vitriol or vinegar?

I have been a member of a pensions committee since 1935. Such committees have done their best to hold the scales fairly and I say that the Minister's officers are not holding the scales fairly. I want to know if you are aware of that or is it the result of a special circular on your behalf? If not, I would ask that you would get in touch with these officers.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy will address the Chair, please. He is falling into an error that is becoming too common. Address the Chair, not the Minister.

Mr. Keyes

I am sorry, Sir. Through the Chair I am appealing to the Minister.

An Ceann Comhairle

Yes, but the Deputy is appealing direct to the Minister.

Mr. Keyes

I am very sorry. I am asking the Minister, through the Chair, pending the time when the Minister and the Government may decide to respond to the unanimous call of this nation to alter the legislation, at least to appeal to his officers to relax the regulations and not to engage in vindictive and harsh prosecution of the regulations governing the administration of the 10/- pension.

Mr. M.E. Dockrell

This country is spending a large sum of money on the maintenance of its old age pensioners and blind pensioners. We, all of us, regret that certain people should fall on evil days and it is a matter of pity, an unfortunate thing, that the State should have these large numbers of people to whom it has to make payments. We make considerable payments to these persons, but I do not think that the community in general gets anything like the results it should get from that large sum which we expend. Our principal aim, we must remember, is to enable these people who are in their old age or, in the case of blind persons, who have fallen on evil days, to maintain themselves; but the allowances made to them are manifestly insufficient for that purpose in present circumstances. I do not think the Minister or any Deputy would attempt to maintain that body and soul can be kept together on 10/- per week —at least, not on the basis of the present cost of living.

This matter of pensions is further complicated by the means test, or perhaps I should say by the application of the means test. In so far as it is defensible, the means test exists as a means of protecting the Exchequer and the community in general against fraud by persons who would wish to obtain pensions when, in fact, they are not really in such necessitous circumstances as to warrant the payment of a pension to them. That, I take it, is the underlying reason for the means test, and, if the means test were confined to that, I do not think anybody here would have anything to complain of but, unfortunately, through the tortuous machinery of bureaucracy, the means test is carried out in very different ways, the result being that unfortunate people are hounded and ground down to the last penny.

I remember a case in which I was interested of an elderly woman who appealed to me to get some information for her as to what pension she would be entitled to. I made inquiries and found that that elderly woman, who was half-crippled, was entitled to a pension of 1/- per week. When I told her, she said she would not demean herself by collecting 1/- per week, adding that "it was too far to walk and it would cost me 3d each way in the bus." When the means test results in something like that, it is high time that this House inquired into the justice of it.

The large sum of money we spend in helping these people is, in many cases, given out in such paltry amounts that it becomes a waste of public money. If a person gets 5/- a week, it is still 5/- a week to the Exchequer, but it may be worth little or nothing to the person getting it, because it may enable that person to pay only a portion of his rent and it is not much use to enable a person to pay part of the rent when he has nothing for food and clothes. We are, on the one hand, wasting money by dribbling it out in small, insignificant sums which, in themselves, are useless, and, on the other hand, failing to attain the object we have in view, namely, to help the aged, infirm and blind. That, I think, is the net position in which we find ourselves to-day, and I think it all points to the necessity for the coordination of social services. Until that is done and until a larger amount of money is paid to these persons, we will still have the very sorry picture of aged persons whom we wish to help not getting anything like the help which the community at large would like to give them and which this House would like to see them getting.

Mr. Commons

A substantial amount of public money is devoted to old age pensioners. It represents the third largest call on the Minister's purse, involving over £3,750,000, but as we can discuss only the amount of money spent and cannot discuss legislation on this Vote, there is not much for Deputies to say. There are, however, a few features of the Vote to which every Deputy seems to be antagonistic. One of these is the manner in which investigation officers carry out inquiries. I do not know whether it is a Government Order that these men should be severe and should go into every detail to find every penny or sixpence which could be classified as income, or whether it is an individual habit on the part of these officers, whether they take a special delight in poking their noses into the most private affairs of people in order to get information, but it is definitely a practice that should be condemned.

There must be a means test, as the previous speaker has said. It would be wrong if people in very good financial circumstances at 70 years of age could get a pension of 10/- a week in the same way as those who are poverty-stricken or down and out. But, nevertheless, this means test is administered too harshly. We all know that people at the age of 70 years are not as sharp or as shrewd as they were, and the sight of an investigation officer coming along scares them into making admissions which may operate against them in the matter of their pensions. It is a well-known fact, and I think Deputy Cafferky mentioned it last evening, that investigation officers have travelled all over people's small holdings, into their cow houses and barns, and have searched every inch of their haggards and gardens in an effort to find something which could be classified as income. That is wrong.

I think Deputy Byrne gave an instance where in some cottage in County Dublin the fact that the tenant had some hens was taken into account in considering income. That would automatically bring down the amount of pension payable. I do not know if I am justified in criticising the administration of this Vote, but if the Minister could in any way ease the arrangements he would definitely be doing something which would be popular in all parts of the House. He knows, with the increase in the cost of living, how worthless even 10/- is to an old age pensioner, not to mention cases where they are only getting 4/-, 5/- 6/- or 7/- weekly. Amounts of that kind are no good whatever to pensioners. As Deputy Dockrell mentioned, it is in many cases waste of money to be paying small pensions of 1/- or 2/- weekly, and expect pensioners to waste their time walking, perhaps, two or three miles to draw them. The whole system should be altered in some way. I refer particularly to the means test. If a person has an income of £39 a year his position now, seeing that the value of the £ has dropped so much, does not compare with what it was ten or 12 years ago. I do not see why the supplementary allowance issued to old age pensioners could not be paid to them when they draw their pensions.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That is a matter for the Department of Local Government.

Mr. Commons

The position would be eased if the supplementary allowance and the pension could be paid at the same office. I know that two Departments are concerned, but if it could be arranged that payments would be made at the same time, the old people would not have to queue up to get the supplementary allowance from the relieving officer. Deputy Hughes pointed out that local pension committees, being composed of just men, tried to the best of their ability to deal with the claims that came before them. I suggest that there should be closer co-operation between local committees and investigation officers. These committees may decide that certain claimants are entitled to the full pension, while some others are only entitled to 2/-, 3/- or 4/- weekly. Sometimes whatever recommendations the committee make are waived aside at the beck and call of local investigation officers. I do not think that is right. If there was closer agreement between the committees and the officers I think the arrangements would work smoother.

It is objectionable that the income of old people who receive money from children who have left this country should be taken into account when computing the amount of a pension. It is no pleasure to these old people to see children leaving home to earn money in other countries. When sons or daughters send home £50, £60 or even £300, to help to repay their parents, that money should not be taken into account when applications are made for the old age pension. I know that it is hard to please everybody, and that the Minister can point out that it would cost perhaps £8,000,000 or £10,000,000 to give pensions that would satisfy the entire community, and that if he did so there would be a hue-and-cry from the Opposition Parties. I honestly think that much more could be done for old age pensioners with the £3,225,000 that are now spent on that service in giving pensions to those who are justly entitled to them.

Political influence of any kind should not be used in such matters. I understand that an order has been issued which states that Deputies should not approach the Pensions Department at the Custom House. I agree that it should be left to the investigation officers, but should their decision be considered a harsh one, if the pensioners wish to complain they have no one to go to but their local representatives. I have in mind the case of an old woman, 70 years of age, whose claim for the full pension was disallowed, and 6/- granted, because her husband, a migratory labourer, who is 68 years of age, sent home money to help in the upkeep of the home.

That procedure is wrong. I hope that some different system will be enforced and that there will be more co-operation between investigation officers and pension committees. When members of old age pension committees are willing to waste a day examining pension claims, investigation officers should not be so harsh or disallow so many claims.

If there was more co-operation there would not be half the complaints that there are from old age pensioners. These old people deserve more consideration than they are getting. I consider that they got little sympathy during the last 20 years. I do not know how soon we will finish with the lip sympathy that they received up to the present. I am glad to see, even at this stage, that the old age pensioners are organising in an effort to further their interests. I think that is the only way that they will make any impression and get what they are justly entitled to get.

Captain Giles

One of the things that gets any man's "goat" is consideration of the position of old age pensioners. Every man in the country is anxious that the Government should make some little effort to ease the burden placed upon these old people. Some years ago, when the Cosgrave Government was in power and when Mr. Blythe, the then Minister for Finance, reduced the old age pensions by 1/- there was an outcry from the Fianna Fáil Party. I agree that that was not a good thing to do; but I would point out in this connection that we should not lose sight of the fact that the purchasing power of 9/- in those days was infinitely greater than the purchasing power of a similar amount of money in these days. North, south, east and west the Fianna Fáil Party made capital out of that reduction of 1/-; they described the Cosgrave Government as a body of tyrants whose main object was the oppression of the poor.

At the present time an old age pensioner would need at least 15/- to 18/- to enable him to eke out some kind of existence owing to present-day prices and the high cost of living. But in the majority of cases, they are not even getting the full 10/- a week; they are getting 3/-, 4/- or 5/- a week and some of them have to walk three miles every week in order to draw that paltry sum. It is disgraceful that a so-called Christian Government should treat its aged poor in that fashion. I know that, if we ask for an increase, we shall be told that such an increase would involve too much money. I say that, no matter how much money is involved, the aged poor of this country are entitled to some little comfort in their declining years and, when they have reached the stage when they shall soon lay down their burdens and pass to their reward, the least we can do is to give them something to ease the last years of their lives. Surely, the Government ought to be able to give them a temporary bonus of 5/- a week.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

We cannot do that without legislation.

Captain Giles

That is as far as I shall go in the matter at the moment. Now, I am entirely opposed to the means test. In connection with old age pensions I think there should be no means test. I know that we shall be told that if the means test were abolished old age pensions would involve millions. I do not believe that they would. I think that it is the duty of the children to look after their aged parents in their declining years. I know that the majority of people, if there were no means test, who are living in fairly comfortable circumstances would never think of looking for old age pensions. Their children would not permit them to look for them because their children have a sense of pride and decency; they do not want any help from the State if they can fend for themselves. We are not such a nation of scroungers that we would jump at any excuse to get a few bob off the Government. Many people when they fall upon hard times have too much pride to look for assistance. They prefer to live their own lives in their own way. Most of the decent people in the country want nothing from the State. They want to pay their own way.

On the other hand, there are certain people who must get help from the State when they are in low water or when they are physically incapable of fending for themselves. Those are the people whom I would like to see the Government helping in a generous way. I think, too, that the cost of carrying out the means test is much too high. All over the country we have officers investigating these claims for old age pensions. These men are in receipt of good salaries and they have travelling expenses all over the country—North, South, East and West. If those investigation officers were abolished their salaries could be devoted towards increasing the old age pensions and they themselves should be left to take up positions as ordinary private individuals instead of spending their time peeking and prying into the intimate affairs of these unfortunate old people. There is no need for that sort of thing. If, as I say, those men's salaries were used to augment the present old age pensions, I do not think the increase would amount to such a very great sum. In most cases the children of aged parents are quite willing to look after them. It is the duty of their children to look after them. Those parents brought those children into the world and they worked hard to rear them to the best of their ability.

It must be remembered, however, that at the present time among a certain section of the community, there is a somewhat bad spirit in regard to Government assistance. That is due in large measure to the doles and various reliefs which are given solely for the purpose of political propaganda. That has left the people in the position that some of them now will look for assistance without making any effort to find work or to fend for themselves. I would like to see that spirit completely wiped out. It is not a suitable spirit for a nation of freemen. We are liable to become a nation of scroungers if something is not done. I know the Government are proud of that fact because we are compelled then to eat out of their hand or else go across the water in order to earn a living. That is what our famous Irish Republican Government has done for us; it is trying to make us a nation of State paupers and public scroungers.

It is sad to think that we have spent five or six years appealing to the Government for a few more shillings for old age pensioners. In Northern Ireland an old age pensioner gets 22/6 a week. That is given with a good grace. Here an unfortunate old age pensioner will hardly get 2/-, 3/-, 4/- or 5/- a week until he is almost on the borders of starvation. In order to get 10/- he would need to be knocking at the door of the workhouse. I have been fighting the case of a poor old man in my area for many years. So far I have met with nothing but failure. This old man is up to 70 years of age and is completely crippled. Before he became completely crippled, eight or ten years ago, he was in receipt of 10/6 a week national health. Some years ago he got a little bit of divided land. For years that land was a liability to him. He could pay neither the rent, nor the rates, nor the taxes. At the time when he became eligible for the old age pension he signed his farm over to his niece. She got married and she, her husband, and a couple of children are now in occupation. This old man made two or three appeals for the old age pension and on every occasion he was turned down. There is not enough on the holding to support all the members of that household. The investigation officer said that he was not entitled to anything because he had a little farm. I know myself that he has no farm. Whether he has or not, I think he is fully entitled to the old age pension. Right beside that man there are two or three old age pensioners drawing the full 10/- for the last 15 years. Their lands are stocked; they have 15 or 20 head of cattle and two, three or four cows. They are able to work their land to the full; yet, some of them are receiving the full 10/- a week. The other man gets nothing. Due to his physical incapacity he spends at least ten months in every year in bed; he has to be dressed by his niece; he cannot go to Mass because the district is too hilly. He cannot fend for himself. His hands are swollen; his legs are swollen. He has nothing more than a bare existence. The 10/- a week would at least buy a few ounces of tobacco for him; that is the only consolation he has left to him in this world. On every occasion his application has been turned down. I say that the investigation officer who is at fault in this particular case has a heavy burden on his conscience and he will have to account some day for the miserable position in which this poor old man is. This old man feels that he is a victim. I myself think he is a victim. I shall bring this case before the Minister again because I will fight to the last ditch. Something will have to be done.

Finally, I appeal again to the Government to do something for these old people even at this eleventh hour. If they got 15/- at the present moment that would not be too bad. That could be done by giving them a temporary emergency bonus of 5/- a week. Again, I would ask the Government and all succeeding Governments to abolish the means test. Very few more will apply for the old age pension. The decent sons and daughters will look after their own parents and not look to the State for anything. I ask the Government to abolish the means test and allow these old people to live in comfort for the few years they have left.

One thing certain is that the investigation officers all over the country are definitely taking two and three years off the lives of these old people. They shake from head to foot when an investigation officer calls on them. He comes in with a lot of pomp and ceremony. He goes around the house and the sheds and out on the land, if there is any land, to find out if they have any hens or an ass and cart. If he finds that there is an ass and cart there he says, "There is comfort in this home." If he sees a dozen hens he will say that they lay a dozen eggs a day. He does not know that some of them do not lay at all. He then calculates that there is so much money coming into the house. He knows well that half a dozen eggs or a dozen eggs would not buy an ounce of tobacco.

The investigation officers should be more humane and charitable instead of acting as spies. I can say definitely that they are going round acting as spies. I know they go to neighbours and ask if so-and-so has any means; if he is well off: or if he has any cash. Every second neighbour is nearly always jealous and says: "Jack So-and-so is going to get a pension. If he gets it, it is hard luck that I will not get it." They will hardly ever do the decent thing and say that the person is entitled to the pension. You will always meet a mean neighbour who will say: "Why should he get it? I saw him selling a bullock at the fair." An investigation officer has that in his mind when investigating the means of such a person. No matter what he is told by that person, he will put him down as a liar and will not believe a word he is told. I am not saying that that is the case with all investigating officers, but I think they are too fond of holding on to their job. They would like to be in the position that the Department will say they are progressive young men who are saving a good deal for the Government and that they are entitled to more remuneration or a bigger job.

Unfortunately I think that is the case all over the country. These are the younger officials and they want to step up the ladder. They are at the bottom rung and they think the best way to get to the highest rung is to do the job very efficiently. They are certainly doing it very efficiently so far as the Department of Finance is concerned. They are certainly keeping the money in the Exchequer and away from these old people, and they have something to answer for because they are not doing justice.

I know investigation officers who went down the country and started talking to some old age pensioners. These old age pensioners thought they were jobbers or something like that and told them that they were well off. Generally people do not want to say that they are down and out because they have a sense of pride. They do not want to tell anyone who comes in that they are down and out. After getting a "tale" from these people the investigating officer will say: "You made a mistake; I am not So-and-so; I am an investigating officer for the old age pension." The moment he says that the poor people almost fall to the ground, because they have destroyed their case. People like that want to show that they are better off than they really are. I think investigation officers should notify old age pensioners as to when they will call on them and not go to them in a deceitful way. They should be open and above board and allow these people to make their case and believe their word. We are not a nation of liars and these old people are not liars. The Government believe that they are, but they are not. You will turn a lot of people into thieves and rogues if you allow a lot of these prying officials to go around like that in a secret and despicable and mean way. We should get shut of all this nonsense by abolishing the means test and let all these young men go back into private life and earn their living in open competition.

I am disgusted with the present Government. They are a lot of impostors. They denounced the Cosgrave Government for taking a 1/- off the old age pension. They have really taken off 5/- or 6/- because 10/- a week now would not go as far as 4/- in the time of the Cosgrave Government. They should give the old age pensioners at least 15/- a week and have no quibbling about it.

I believe they are the most despicable Government in Europe. They boast about being a Christian Government and want to get headlines in the European papers by saying: "We are feeding the people of Europe." They ought to tell the world that they are starving their own people at home; that they have people at home worse off than the people of Europe through their own mismanagement of affairs. Instead of looking for headlines in European papers it would be better for them to look after their own people.

Mr. Cogan

I did not intend to intervene in this debate, but to-day I received from the Baltinglass local pensions committee the following resolution:—

"That this sub-committee considers that the maximum pension to those entirely depending on it is hopelessly inadequate and is only a means of prolonging life in sordid conditions. We appeal to the authorities to increase the amount to such a level as would enable them to spend the closing years of their life in peace and comfort."

As the Minister is aware, an old age pension committee is not a political body. It is not confined to any particular Party or class. It is representative of the various interests in the district in which it operates. It is particularly representative of the clergy and social workers who have the interests of the nation at heart and, particularly, the interests of the poor and destitute in their district. A committee of this kind representative of all Parties is not likely to make any unjust or immoderate demand on the State. From its constitution, it is more likely to be influenced by considerations of justice and fair play. A committee of this kind not only considers the case of the poor and the destitute but also the claims of the tax paying community and of the State. It weighs all the issues fairly. Having weighed these issues fairly, this local committee in my constituency has made this request to the Government. The Minister may say it is easy for a local committee to make a demand such as this.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I do not think this has anything to do with the administration of the Minister's Department over the past year.

Mr. Cogan

This resolution was passed last week and, as this committee forms part of the machinery operating the Act, I think the views of its members ought to receive some consideration.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

But they are advocating something that cannot be done within the existing legislation.

Mr. Cogan

If I am out of order in putting this request before the House, I think I have a good many companions in this debate. It was very unfair and altogether wrong to seek to improve the position by imposing an additional burden on the local authorities. The Minister should take full responsibility for the administration of this service. It is not a local service in any sense of the word. It is humiliating and degrading upon the old age pensioners to have to go to the relieving officer and claim that they are absolutely destitute. It is degrading, not only on the pensioner, but on the members of his family. The decent thing in this case would have been to give a small increase on the maximum pension, thus raising the 10/- to 12/6. That would have been a small relief if it were given in the right way, but, given in the manner in which it has been given, it is an insult to the old age pensioner and an injustice to the local authorities.

One thing the Minister has to bear in mind is that the value of money has fallen. He must realise that 10/- to-day would not equal more than half what it was six or seven years ago. Realising that, he must take the view that the old age pensioners were either too generously treated in pre-war years, or that they are being very unjustly treated to-day. If the Minister had proposed to reduce old age pensions to 5/- or 6/- in 1938 or 1939 there would have been a tremendous outcry throughout the State, but the same result has been achieved owing to the rising cost of essential commodities.

It is particularly hard on old age pensioners who are living alone, who have to pay rent for their little houses and who have to provide fuel for heating and cooking. The Minister should take a fair and reasonable view of the situation. He ought to be influenced by the unprejudiced and impartial view expressed by all sections of the community, that the allowance to the old age pensioners is unfair and that there ought to be a reasonable increase.

Mr. Hughes

I suppose while we have the law as it stands, with the means test, we must inevitably have investigation. That investigation, so far as individual officers are concerned, is not a very nice job and it is inevitable that a considerable amount of criticism of their work is likely to arise. Hence we have listened to Deputies criticising the administration of this Act. I agree with Deputies who have made representations on the matter, about the very low purchasing power of 10/-. In view of that, it is grossly unfair to have such a rigid interpretation of the Act. I do not know whether it results from the work of the investigation officers or whether they are directed to be very strict in their interpretation of the income of the home, but it is well known that the value put on the income from very poor land by an investigation officer is out of all proportion to the actual income. It is grossly unfair and unjust.

Why is it necessary, if the people who administer this Act know their job, to have so many appeals to the Ministers? The proof that their decision is wrong and their administration is harsh, unjust and unfair, is to be found in the number of appeals allowed in favour of the applicants. That number forms a very high proportion of the total number of appeals. If this Act were properly administered, I believe very few appeals would be made and, of the appeals made, a very low percentage would be decided in favour of the applicants. If the investigation officers were doing their job properly, that would be the position.

When a high percentage of the appeals is decided in favour of the applicants, that is clear proof that the administration generally is unfavourable to applicants and, in view of the very low purchasing power of 10/- —its value now is approximately 5/— that is unjust.

The very close scrutiny given to the incomes of people, who look forward to those few shillings to bring them a modicum of happiness at the end of their lives, is an objectionable feature. Imagine taking into account the few shillings a mother may get from her son in England. The money is given as a gift, but yet it is computed as income. I think the Legislature never intended that it should be regarded as income. There is no guarantee that it will continue over any definite period. The giver never intended or expected that his mother's old age pension would be reduced because of the amount he sent her.

I should like to know whether investigation officers are advised by the Department to be rigid in their investigations and in their sense of values in so far as the very small and doubtful incomes on holdings of very low quality land are concerned. I have often been shocked at the heartless attitude of investigating officers. The investigating officers ought to be better qualified to arrive at a closer decision. If the Act were being worked efficiently, the number of decisions by the Minister in favour of applicants would be very small. That would be a proof that those administering the Act were capable of doing their jobs in an efficient way. It would reduce the actual cost of administration. It would reduce the number of appeals that are cluttering up the Department of Local Government, for a decision on which unfortunate people have to wait three or four months. Surely it reflects on the administration. I have no doubt the Minister is sympathetic in this matter and I would ask him personally to look into it and to end that sort of thing.

In connection with the supplementary allowance of 2/6, it is grossly unfair, in the case where a parent is living with a married son who has a family and who finds it very difficult to live, that because there is income other than the pension going into that home, the supplementary allowance will not be granted. I regard that as positively disgraceful. If we can afford to be generous, at least we can afford to be generous to the old people who can hope to draw this contribution from the State for only a very short period. There is a good deal of resentment in the country in regard to the manner in which this is being administered and I would ask the Minister to give it his personal attention.

Minister for Finance (Mr. Aiken)

I want to say, first of all, that there have been no new instructions issued to investigation officers for the last ten years. The investigation officers carry out their functions under the law, namely, to determine the means of the applicant. No matter where we set the limit of means, there will always be border-line cases in connection with which there will be disputes. As the law stands, there is a means test. Some Deputies favour the retention of the means test and the increasing of the pensions.

Mr. Hughes

Surely in a border-line case the applicant should get the benefit. Are we going to be so hard and rigid with a border-line case that we will fight it to a shilling or two?

Mr. Aiken

In relation to any cases of hardship that have been alleged and that I have examined, in the assessment of means the applicant has been treated generously. The interpretation of the instructions and the law is carried out by the investigation officers with a sense of duty.

Mr. Hughes

And very rigidly. The applicant never gets the benefit of any doubt that may exist.

Mr. Aiken

It all depends on the interpretation of "rigidity." There have been various suggestions made here to-day, as there usually are on Votes of this kind, about increasing the various allowances. I think the height was touched by Deputy Giles who put forward a slight suggestion of 50/- a week that would cost somewhere between £25,000,000 and £30,000,000. However, many Deputies would be satisfied with something less than that.

Practically everybody in the country would like to see an increase in the minimum standard of life that is guaranteed to all citizens. We had a discussion about old age pensioners a couple of months ago. Certain suggestions were made then which would have cost about £12,500,000. The question is, can the State afford to provide, in present circumstances, very much more than it is providing for this particular service? We are spending around £4,000,000 on old age pensions and blind pensioners and if we want to see their standard of living very greatly increased, we have either to increase the volume of goods available for general consumption or these pensioners must get an increase at the expense of somebody else.

During the last few years there have been a number of improvements in social services, including old age pensions. The family allowances scheme is costing a fair amount of money, but I do not think anybody would suggest, for instance, that family allowances should be cut off in order to increase old age pensions. Over the last 14 years, a big number of social services have been added and, as the Taoiseach pointed out, the time has arrived when they should all be looked at again with a view to seeing whether they cannot be co-ordinated and whether the expenses of administration cannot be reduced. That work is in the offing and I hope the new Department will soon be set up and that the Minister who will be responsible will take over the whole responsibility for the administration of the old age pensions, widows' and orphans' pensions and the various other social services. In the meantime, I can only say that if there are any specific allegations made against an official, over which a Deputy can stand, and if he reports the matter to the Revenue Commissioners or to me, they will be investigated. That invitation is a usual invitation for a Minister for Finance, handling this Estimate, to make and, notwithstanding the eloquence of the Deputies here in denouncing the activities of the investigation officers, very few of them will come forward and give a specific case and make a special charge.

Deputies usually content themselves with making certain wild allegations, such as Deputy Giles made, that an old person, who has no means, has been refused a pension and that her neighbours all around who are not entitled to them and who have vast sums coming in annually are getting pensions. That is about as far as a number of Deputies are prepared to go. If there is any Deputy who has a special case, either where the State is being defrauded by pensions being given where they should not be given according to the law, or where, in his opinion, an applicant is not receiving the benefits to which he is entitled under the law, I am quite prepared to investigate it, or to get the Revenue Commissioners to investigate it.

Vote put and agreed to.