I move that the Bill be now read a Second Time. It is the customary annual one, its purpose being to maintain the Defence Forces (Temporary Provisions) Acts in force for a further 12 months, up to 31st March, 1944. There have been no amendments made to the present Act, and I do not think it is necessary for me to say anything further on the matter.
Defence Forces (Temporary Provisions) Bill, 1943—Second and Subsequent Stages.
I would like to say a word or two in furtherance of the matter raised by me at Question Time to-day with the Minister for Defence in regard to soldiers' dependents' allowances. The Minister stated that an increase was given some time ago to the dependents of soldiers. I suggest to him that the increase given is absolutely inadequate to enable those people to cope with the ever-increasing cost of living. As far as I can ascertain, an increase was given about 12 months ago. Since then the cost of living, according to the figures furnished by the Department of Industry and Commerce, has increased by 48 points. That was up to mid-November. The probability is that there has been a further increase since. In view of that, will the Minister ask his colleagues in the Government to agree to give those people an increase that will be commensurate with the increased cost of living? There is no question at all but that in some parts of the country, especially in the cities and towns, some of the dependents of soldiers are on the verge of starvation. The amount of money given to them is not at all sufficient to enable them to get proper food for themselves and their children, not to speak at all of the provision of clothing. The Minister has admitted that the cost of living has increased by the figures I have quoted. He can verify them by referring to the Trade Journal, issued by the Department of Industry and Commerce.
During the discussion on this question to-day Deputy Davin pointed out that some of these dependents are not in receipt of any allowance at all. They are people who got married after a certain date. I submit that is very unfair. When a man is accepted as a soldier the Government should accept in respect of him the obligations they have undertaken in connection with other soldiers. I should like the Government to have that matter reconsidered.
Another thing that is a great source of anxiety to the dependents of soldiers is the fact that payment is made fortnightly. It has been suggested by soldiers' dependents with whom I have come into contact that if they were paid weekly it would be more satisfactory for them. I think Deputy Byrne has had complaints of that sort, too. The weekly payment would be much more satisfactory, especially when the amount is so small. I should like the Minister to ask his colleagues in the Government to agree to an increase for these unfortunate people.
As to the question of the marriage and children's allowances, it was only very recently that I took the matter up with the Government, and I am glad to say that I was successful in securing an increase.
That was a good while ago.
It was not so very long ago, and I know the difficulty I had in getting a case prepared and in putting up arguments to convince my colleagues that the request I was submitting was a reasonable one. The position at the present moment is that a class III private, with a wife and three children, now receives 45/6 a week, as against 33/3 before the emergency. A class I private receives 49/- now as against 36/9. A sergeant receives 63/- now as against 54/3, and a company sergeant receives 70/- as against 61/3. If deferred pay is included, it means an additional 3/6 a week. All these men will, in due course, receive that deferred pay of 3/6 a week, which is being put to their credit.
That is of very little use to the dependents. What are the dependents to receive?
The figures I have given are exclusive of ration allowances, clothing, accommodation, fuel, and other incidentals. Further, a large number of soldiers receive additional pay, ranging from 1/9 to 28/- a week. These soldiers would be tradesmen or men in other types of occupation. Apart from pay, additional pay and medical and chaplaincy services, it has been calculated that a single soldier costs the State 24/- a week.
What does a dependent get — what is the allocation?
A class III private with a wife and three children receives the equivalent of 69/6 a week — that is for the lowest class private in the Army. A first-class private receives the equivalent of 73/-; a sergeant the equivalent of 87/- and a company sergeant the equivalent of 94/-. The figures which I have given compare very favourably with the rates which the soldier would receive in average employment in civil life. I do not think anyone will question that. The present rates of marriage allowance are: A wife, 1/6 a day; one child, 1/-; two children, 2/-, and three children, 2/6. In other words, a wife with three children receives 28/- a week as against 19/3 before I got this addition awarded to them.
Mr. Byrne
What about a woman with eight children?
There is additional pay for each child.
Is the 2/- allowance for the day or for the week?
It is 2/- per day. With regard to the marriage allowance applying to all and sundry, we cannot do that. But even there I have been able to get the Government to reduce the age limit to 23 years. I think it is very reasonable that a young man of 23 years, married and in the Army, is now entitled to go on the marriage establishment, but he must have two years' service, and get the permission of his commanding officer. If he gets that permission — if, in the opinion of the commanding officer, it would be well to have this young man on the marriage allowance—he goes on, but that is not allowed in any other circumstances. There are a number of young men who have refused to go through the formality of asking this permission.
As regards weekly payment, that is a thing that I took up with the Department and I found that we would have to bring in a large staff to deal with the weekly payments. If there is any hardship — I do not believe there is — I do not think that, whatever the amount would be, it would be sufficient to warrant going to the expense of enlarging the staff.
Question —"That the Bill be now read a Second Time"— agreed to.
It is customary to deal with all the remaining stages on this occasion and, as there are to be no amendments, I suggest that the House should agree to the remaining stages being taken now.
Agreed and ordered accordingly.
Bill put through Committee without amendment and reported.
Question—"That the Bill be now received for final consideration"— agreed to.
Question proposed: "That the Bill do now pass."
I should like to know if there is any hope of dropping this practice of making temporary provisions and getting down to a permanent measure. When are we likely to get the permanent measure? It was promised us quite a long time ago.
It will not be possible to introduce such a measure during the emergency.
That is all I wanted to know.
The Deputy will appreciate the difficulty of introducing such a measure. The regulations are changing from day to day.
Question agreed to.