Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 24 Nov 1949

Vol. 118 No. 10

In Committee on Finance. - Army Pensions (Increase) Bill, 1949—Committee and Subsequent Stages.

Bill reported without amendment.
Agreed to take remaining stages to-day.
Bill received for final consideration.
Question proposed: "That the Bill do now pass."

I want to mention for the Minister's consideration cases which are undoubtedly cases of hardship. Nothing could be done in relation to amending this Bill on Committee Stage by any Deputy, but there is no doubt at all that it will be necessary for the Minister to review all these cases of pensions, because the increase granted does not meet the case of quite a number of people who are receiving pensions under the Army Pensions Acts. While the increases granted are welcomed, there are many cases of grave hardship.

I came across a case the other day of a man who had lost a leg as a result, I think, of a wound and whose pension was about £1 1s. 0d. per week. It has been increased by some 8/- and he now has roughly £1 8s. 0d. per week. Obviously, that pension for such a man is entirely inadequate. Just to-day, I got by post particulars of an individual to whom a pension of 18/1 per week was granted. He has never taken up his pension because he considered it entirely inadequate. He was a soldier, and his case is one about which quite a number of Deputies, according to the file I got, were in touch with the Department. He lost the use of his hand while working as a baker in the bakery at the Curragh. He is completely unable to use one hand and he received an original pension of 18/1 per week. He would be entitled to a certain increase under this Bill, but that increase is not adequate.

We are entirely in the hands of the Minister and of the Department of Finance as regards the amounts paid as pensions, but I urge that something might be done to increase the basic pensions of men who are absolutely unable to earn a livelihood. This Bill increasing pensions is undoubtedly welcome, but the Minister himself knows that there are cases of hardship. I have been approached in regard to three or four of these cases in the past few days, and I avail of this opportunity to ask the Minister to take power at the earliest possible date to review cases such as those I have mentioned, so that any person who has lost the ability to earn a livelihood, because of service in the Defence Forces, may be awarded a pension which will enable him to live, not in luxury, but in reasonable comfort.

I should like to support Deputy Cowan's plea. It has come to my knowledge that there are quite a few very deserving cases of general disability and of inability to earn a livelihood by reason of an infirmity. An increase has been granted, but it is not adequate to meet the needs of these people and to enable them to carry on, and, in dealing with this matter, the Minister should consider such cases of general disability, cases of men who, during the past year or so, have become totally incapacitated.

The case made by Deputy Cowan and supported by Deputy Burke is a genuine case. The unfortunate thing about all these wounds and disability pensions Acts is that different rates of pensions are set out in the different Acts and what was reasonable and generous in 1923, in the conditions that existed in 1923, is only a pittance in 1949. You have cases where the disability is the same but where very different rates of pension are fixed. It is all very involved and complicated, and I think it was worked out very successfully, with the money available, by the people dealing with it. We tried so far as possible to equate similar pensions with similar disabilities. The case made by the Deputies will certainly be looked into and considered with a view to future action.

Question put and agreed to.

This is a Money Bill within the meaning of Article 22 of the Constitution.

Barr
Roinn