I take it that most of the people referred to in this section are people who are moving on in life.
Committee on Finance. - Army Pensions Bill, 1973: Committee and Final Stages.
Section 1 agreed to.
SECTION 2.
Question proposed: "That section 2 stand part of the Bill."
Indeed, yes. I gave the House the figures last week and again today. The number is quite large. There are 30,000 medal holders but not all of them have got pensions.
There is no closing date.
No closing date. We are giving them the option and we are not saying that they must exercise it within a specified time.
Question put and agreed to.
Sections 3 to 6, inclusive, put and agreed to.
SECTION 7.
Question proposed: "That section 7 stand part of the Bill."
Section 7 (a) refers to disablement due to a wound received on or after 3rd September, 1939, and that would be in reference really to the start of World War II.
That is correct. There is only one other point I should make: we have been talking to some extent as if this affects only Old IRA but in actual fact it affects all soldiers discharged over the years.
Question put and agreed to.
Sections 8 and 9, agreed to.
SECTION 10.
Question proposed: "That section 10 stand part of the Bill."
Section 10 and section 12 are really coming into line with Defence Force Regulations.
It is just a question of tidying up.
There was a time, sad to say, when a soldier's wife got no marriage allowance. We are now substituting "a married rate of pay in accordance with Defence Force Regulations".
This section refers to section 11 of the Act of 1968 which means that we are recognising our Forces on duty with the United Nations. This also covers our Forces with the United Nations.
If our soldiers get injured abroad or wounded while serving under the United Nations is there a special fund for them and do we qualify under that fund?
We pay the pensions and we recover from the United Nations.
Question put and agreed to.
SECTION 11.
Question proposed: "That section 11 stand part of the Bill."
We have already discussed this. I take it the Minister will mention this to the Minister for Finance?
I will certainly recommend that the widows of special allowance holders should get consideration but my problem is, as the play puts it, the undeserving poor are just as hungry as the deserving poor; I think it is from Pygmalion. The unfortunate widow of a special allowance holder with a fixed income is just as badly off as the widow who is not the widow of a special allowance holder. From the point of view of equity there is a problem there.
Question put and agreed to.
Sections 12 and 13 agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported without amendment and received for final consideration.
Question proposed: "That the Bill do now pass."
May I repeat my earlier plea in relation to a tax rebate on or tax exemption for Old IRA pensions? The Minister earlier suggested the way in which he proposed to deal with this problem was by giving increased pensions. I go with him to a certain extent on that but I would emphasise that it is his responsibility and that of his colleagues in government to try to ensure that these people are properly rewarded. They got very niggardly benefits considering the services they rendered.
I take Deputy Timmons' point. I am fully aware of the humanitarian views of Deputy Timmons who is probably one of the nicest gentlemen who comes into this House. However, there are very rich men in receipt of Old IRA pensions also. When we saw the end of hostilities on the formation of our State some of those who fought for our country at that time were people who may not have been well off before it and, as I said during the course of this debate, were not blessed with the world's goods afterwards. These are the people who are the special allowance holders.
Military service pensions are payable to people who could be millionaires. In fact, I could think of a couple of people who were very nearly millionaires and who, if they did apply for a military service pension—it is possible that they did so—were entitled to them and were paid them. That type of person should, in all equity, be liable to pay tax on that pension just as he would on his very large income. However, when it comes to the poor person that person would not be liable for tax anyway. The provision in respect of special allowances is related to income and the limit of income allowed to a person before he or she would get a special allowance is such that they would not be subject to tax.
I would consider my task in trying to convince the Minister for Finance, the Government or any Government or Minister for Finance, that what Deputy Timmons says is proper would be a very hard one. In my view the right way to approach this is to give more to the needy, and to give to those who are entitled to military service pensions and who are well off more also but take some of it back in taxation.
We have got through this Bill nice and quickly today and in my view the provisions contained in it are long overdue. We are all well aware that the people we are trying to help are people who gave great service to this country whether they were in the regular Army or were in the Old IRA. We should be only too anxious to help them in every way. I can assure the Minister that while I am Opposition spokesman on Defence I will always have respect for our Army and the people who are safeguarding this country.
In this Bill we are trying to help people who helped us to gain the partial freedom we have and people who served us well in the regular Army during the Emergency. These people took a lot of risks and went through tough times without the modern amenities and conveniences that the Army have today. We appreciate that and any Bill the Minister brings in to better their lot in life now that they are advancing in years will receive our backing.
Question put and agreed to.
This Bill is certified a Money Bill in accordance with Article 22 of the Constitution.