asked the Minister for Local Government and Public Health whether he will state why Patrick McDaniel, Stamullen, Co. Meath, was originally allowed only 4s. per week instead of 10s., and whether he is aware that owing to the recent reduction in old age pensions this man now receives only 3s. per week, and, further, whether, in view of the fact that this man is destitute, he will take the necessary steps to have his old age pension increased to 9s. per week.
CEISTEANNA—QUESTIONS. ORAL ANSWERS. - STAMULLEN OLD AGE PENSION CLAIM.
The means in this case were estimated for old age pension purposes at 15s. a week, and on the 12th January last a pension of 4s. a week was, therefore, allowed in accordance with the schedule as to means then in force appended to the Old Age Pensions Act, 1919.
As regards the second part of the question, I would refer the Deputy to the reply given yesterday to Deputy Morrissey in the case of Mr. R. Teefy. Section 3 of the Old Age Pensions Act, 1924, directs a general reduction (with certain specified exceptions) of 1s. a week in old age pensions and blind pensions existing on 20th June, 1924, pending a readjustment directed by Section 4 of that Act in accordance with the new scale of means prescribed in the first schedule thereof, which readjustment will take effect from 5th September, 1924.
The exceptions referred to are:—
(1) Pensioners who on the 20th June, 1924, have attained the age of 80 years, suffer no reduction under these sections.
(2) Pensioners drawing 1s. a week prior to 20th June, 1924, continue to draw such pension until 5th September next unless otherwise disqualified.
I have no power to reconsider the decision already arrived at unless a fresh appeal is made in the usual way. As this case came before me again on appeal as recently as April last, when it was carefully investigated, I do not consider a fresh appeal now would serve any useful purpose, unless the facts have materially altered since.
Is the Minister aware that Patrick McDaniel made a declaration which was signed and witnessed stating that he had no means of living except the pension that he desired to receive at the time, and that to-day he has no other means of livelihood except the 3s. granted to him?
I have only the information contained in the answer, and I see in the answer a statement that the case came up on appeal in April last, and was carefully investigated at that time. I take it that all the relevant facts were considered by the Minister in April last.