asked the Minister for Defence whether a person (name supplied) in County Dublin with over 35 years service in the Army has had his pension to the amount of £913.93 withheld because he is overholding in married quarters; if so, what assistance the Army authorities have given to provide him with alternative housing; and what arrangements can be made so that this man will be paid the pension which is due to him following his prolonged service.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Army Pension Payment.
95.
The answer to the first part of the Deputy's question is in the affirmative.
As regards the second part of the question, the provision of houses for ex-military personnel is a matter for the local authorities concerned who are generally co-operative in this regard. Soldiers who are about to be released from the Permanent Defence Force are advised by the military authorities to apply to the local authorities concerned for rehousing. Following the making of each such application, my Department requests the local authority to give favourable consideration to each individual case.
As regards the third part of the question, Defence Force Regulations provide for the recovery, as a public debt, of charges in respect of the use of quarters, furniture, water, gas and/ or electricity by former members of the Permanent Defence Force. While unauthorised possession of quarters is continued, it is not possible to finalise those charges. The Defence Forces (Pensions) Scheme provides for the recovery of such charges from pension and for the withholding of pension until the amount of deduction is ascertained.
Does the Parliamentary Secretary not think it a little unusual, even if these regulations have been in force for some time, that a man who served for over 35 years in the Irish Army should have £913.93 withheld from him because he is overholding through no fault of his own, due to a housing crisis situation? There is a housing shortage all over Dublin. It is not this man's fault. Surely the Parliamentary Secretary could make an arrangement by which this man could be forwarded some of the money?
This man left the Army on 29th December, 1965, and he has been overholding since that date. The Army did, in fact, pay him a certain amount of money arising out of the predicament in which he found himself. They have been more than fair to him. The Army have been making every effort to have him rehoused. There is a friendly relationship between the Army and the local authority and I think in this case it may work out to the betterment of his situation.
Does it not highlight the housing situation in Dublin that since 1965 it has not been possible to house this man?
That is not the position.
Surely the Parliamentary Secretary will agree that where this amount of money has been withheld from an Army man, a patriot who served for over 35 years, some rate of interest should be paid to him?
That would be a separate question. Question No. 96.
I have explained the position to the Deputy.
The position is disgraceful.
I do not agree. I do not accept the Deputy's arguments.
That a man with 35 years service should have this amount of money withheld——
The Deputy is absolutely wrong.