This is an important Estimate because it refers to people who have received payment from the State for disabilities and so on. Our responsibility does not end on presentation of a paltry sum. Much more must be done for these people.
I should like to read a letter which I received this morning in relation to pensions:
A few years ago the Minister for Defence in a gesture of goodwill authorised the payment of army pensions before Christmas instead of on the 31st December. This year, as you know, with the price of things it is going to be much harder to manage. Would you in your capacity as Opposition spokesman try to persuade the Minister to do likewise this year? I am a pensioner, unable to work, with a wife and two school-going children, and I would appreciate your efforts.
I would ask the Minister to consider this matter and to make payment of pensions before Christmas, if at all possible.
In relation to the estimate, we cannot measure the service given or the lives of these people in terms of pounds and pennies. We are talking about men whose lives have been disrupted because of disabilities received during service. We are inclined to write-off their disabilities as occupational hazards. The major factor is the problems of the families of army personnel. The men concerned are all of unquestionable loyalty and have played their part to ensure that we can live without fear and intimidation. It is sad to think that their families have been overlooked. People who receive diability pensions are a special group and require special attention. I appeal for new thinking in relation to these people. We should not feel that we have dispensed with them as the barrack gates click behind their heels. When a person receives a wound or disability he is unable to do much more than to move around the house, and the future of his family must be considered.
Recently the Fianna Fáil Party produced a discussion document which gave attention to this aspect. I want to indicate that they had a section to provide that people discharged from service with service-connected disabilities would be compensated in some way and the hardship relieved.
No one will disagree with this Army pension estimate. It is sad to think that in many cases the compensation is too small. We would all like to increase these services. The after-care service of the individuals concerned and the welfare of their wives and children are vitally important.
I take this opportunity to outline some thought that should be given to this problem. People discharged from service because of service-connected disability of one type or another should get educational assistance after service in order to ensure that they can fit themselves in some way for the life ahead. It is sad to think that when no opportunity is open to them they can be pushed into a wheelchair or a room. We must give them hope for the future. They should have the opportunity of doing continuation courses so that if they want to pursue the educational studies that might have been disrupted by the service disability they should have these courses. Some responsible employers are taking on people who are disabled, and ex-service men should have assistance from the Department to enable them fit themselves for interviews and for employment. Educational loan facilities should be available to these people so that they can pursue courses leading to professional and vocational qualifications. There should be correspondence courses for them if they are unable to participate actively in other courses. There are many men with service disabilities who would be willing to pursue in some way educational courses which could enable them to relieve the situation they are placed in.
It is important that the widows or wives of disabled ex-service men can avail of these services. They have to provide for the children when the father is disabled and cannot do so. If the wife becomes the breadwinner the Department must ensure that she has the wherewithal and the necessary aids and backups to ensure that the family who may have been deprived of opportunities because of their father's disability may now be provided with the opportunities. These opportunities must be provided to the wives of ex-servicemen with total or partial disability.
Finally, for eligible ex-servicemen a system of vocational rehabilitation should be available to those with disabilities who too often are forgotten, but who can be vital to the community. They have knowledge, and there are various sections of Government where this knowledge can be utilised to the benefit of the community as a whole. Prior to training, suitable vocational counselling should be available. Suitable tuition and training should be provided to put these people on the right road to rehabilitation. We should not cast these people aside as we have done in the past. It is sad to see many of them cast aside for so long without reference to their family needs or wants, to see members of their families deprived of opportunities because of the service disability of these men. I appeal to the Minister to ensure that additional thought is given to this most deserving section.
In relation to the wound and disability section, the period for claiming allowances or pensions is up to two years after service at home and up to seven years after service with the United Nations. This is an area we should examine. Many of the diseases stay dormant for years, particularly tropical diseases, and many people who contracted TB during Army service have found it impossible to pin the matter down when released from service. Men who served with me and with other Members of this House have been deprived of institutional or other service and of consideration by the Department of the claims they have made. An extension of the period is necessary and desirable. Some diseases may take some years to develop and to become chronic. Establishment of proof is the vital factor and one which we should be concerned with, not determining a date. These limits are too harsh on occasions. I ask the Minister to consider an extension of those periods so that justice will be done.
I impress upon the Minister the need for an examination of military service pensions to members of the Defence Forces. We know that when a serviceman dies, NCO or man, his widow receives no pension whatsoever. After his lifetime of service to the nation, having moved around the country from station to station, being away on border duties, service abroad, the great loss of social life and the unsocial hours the widow has had to adjust herself too while he was on service. She gets no compensation. Again she is thrown over to another Department for refuge, the Department of Social Welfare, perhaps, or some health authority. Some portion at least of the man's pension should be paid to the widow. I hope that this matter will be considered in order to ensure that this very deserving section, the widows and families of deceased members, would get this necessary attention.
I would apply the same measures to the widow of an ex-serviceman as I would to the wife of an ex-serviceman in relation to educational facilities which should be available to her in order to ensure that her family would be maintained and have the opportunities they would have had, had their father lived. Many of these men have laid down their lives. A man with service of 23 or 24 years is entitled to a pension and if he dies at that stage the pension dies with him. No one has availed of it and his widow gets nothing. I hope there will be some examination at an early stage in order to ensure that justice is done.
Relating to pensions in general, I hope there will be a re-examination of the system to see whether the qualifying period could be reduced from 21 years to a lesser period of 18 years or so. This is realistic in modern times when the pension is so small and when people have to make their way in the world. If a person could ease himself out on pension at an earlier stage he would then be in a better position if they want to maintain themselves and their families with any degree of respectability. The qualifying period should be reduced so as to give this opportunity. It might have many further advantages for the services as a whole in relation to the efficiency of personnel, and men would not have to remain there for the other two, three or four years just because they want to get a pension. I hope the situation will be examined in the near future and from time to time.
A comprehensive review of the pensions scheme for NCOs and men should be carried out. There should be an overall study of the pensions scheme for all ranks with a view to achieving equity and removing anomalies. When an officer dies, his widow gets up to 50 per cent of his pay at the time of death if she has four children. The soldier has not the same opportunity of making a contribution as the officer does. The officer's widow is looked after. The wife of a private or NCO is just as important. She has the same responsibilities and problems. It is hard to think that one section are cared for even though they make a contribution, while others are disregarded. I am quite sure the personnel would be happy to make a contribution to ensure that their families would be protected in the event of their death.
When a person is promoted to NCO he must have that rank for 12 months before he is entitled to the pension for that rank on retirement. Once a person is promoted, that promotion should stand to him and he should be entitled to a pension at the higher rate just as he is entitled to pay at the higher rate. I see no difference. An adjustment must be made in this area as soon as possible to ensure that justice is done. It is sad to think that a person can be promoted and then lose that advantage when he retires. I hope this matter will get the early attention of the Department.
The whole question of pensions is complicated and needs to be reviewed. Very few people can discuss army pensions. The whole system is so confused and complicated that one would need to be an expert to discuss it in a rational way. It is far beyond me and many other people in this House. On the question of compensation for personnel of the defence forces who are killed or injured, the position seems to be very loose. There is a reference to the Local Defence Force. Does the same system apply to the FCA? Is there a distinction between the FCA and the Local Defence Force as indicated in subhead G?
What is the position in relation to compensation for injuries sustained by members of the FCA on training or at local parades? Training parades are weekend parades and local parades are evening parades. What is the position in relation to treatment? If a person meets with an accident he may get free hospitalisation in one of the military hospitals, but no pay. If he has to convalesce for a period he gets no pay. This is serious. It should be automatic. He should be either on the payroll or not on the payroll. He should remain on it while he is disabled. He should not have to go to a solicitor to extract a settlement. This issue needs to be reexamined with a view to achieving parity with the position of a person in the permanent defence forces who is unfortunate enough to meet with an accident.
Subhead G deals with a very weak section of society. It is sad to see how the Department and Governments deal with them. We were told recently that there are 2,218 people with less than £5 a week. We were told they are incapable of self-support by reason of age or permanent infirmity and there is a means test. This is very complicated. It is sad to think these people are sometimes humiliated when they look for their entitlement. Recently in reply to a question asked by Deputy Meaney the Minister for Defence said:
Each case is taken on its merits and, therefore, there is no such thing as a fixed upper income. I could help the Deputy by telling him that in years past there have been very great relaxations. That means that anyone who is near the stage of being in want will get a special allowance. We disregard in full increases in the various social welfare benefits since January, 1969. As from 1st October, 1964, the first £60 of military service pensions, disability pensions and Connaught Rangers pensions have been disregarded in the case of applicants under 70 years of age and the first £30 where the applicant has reached 70 years. The increases granted in such pensions since August, 1965, are also disregarded. The value of the labour of children under 18 years of age, the first £50 of gifts in cash from brothers or sisters or from children at home are disregarded. The assessment of the means of children under 18 years of age has been relaxed and all social welfare payments in respect of children are disregarded. The assessment of the profit from the contributions of members of the family over 18 years of age who are living at home has been relaxed and no profit is assessed on a contribution of £7.70 per week in a rural area or £8.20 per week in an urban area. That is not really an upper limit, but it is the figure where the income coming into the house is disregarded.
Deputy Brennan said:
While I agree with the Minister's assessment for special allowance disregarded social welfare payments, Social Welfare do not disregarded his increases. They will reduce an old man's pension.
The Minister agreed that they would reduce an old man's pension.
