Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 9 Mar 1961

Vol. 187 No. 3

Committee on Finance. - Army Pensions (Increase) Bill, 1961 —Second Stage.

Aire Cosanta (Caoimhghín Ó Beoláin)

Tairgim: go leifí an Bille athuair anois.

Is é is mó atá sa Bhille ná méaduithe a dheonadh ar phinsin chréachta, ar phinsin mhí-threora agus ar phinsin phósta agus ar liúntais áirithe do chleithiúnaithe ar dhaoine marbha, is iníoctha faoi na hAchtanna Arm-Phinsean, 1923 go 1960. Tá éifeacht ag na méaduithe sin Ó'n 1ú Lúnasa, 1960, i leith agus tá siad á n-íoc ón lá sin amach ar údarás Meastacháin Bhreise le haghaidh pinsean a ritheadh sa Teach seo ar an 20ú Iúil, 1960.

Tríd is tríd, tá na méaduithe a bhfuil trácht orthu in Ailt 2 go 23, 25, 26 agus 27 de réir na méaduithe le haghaidh pinsinéirí Stáit, i gcoitinne, a údaraíodh ag an Aire Airgeadais ina Ráiteas ar an gCáinaisnéis in Aibreán, 1960. Tá pinsinéirí oifigeach, a bhfuil a bpinsin gaolmhar dá bpá Airm ar dháta a n-urscaoilte, ag fáil méadú de 7½% má urscaoileadh iad roimh an 1ú Meán Fómhair, 1949, agus méadú de 5% má urscaoileadh iad ar an dáta sin nó dá éis agus roimh an 2ú lá Samhain, 1955. (Ós rud é go ngabhann an dáta 1ú Meán Fómhair, 1949, le hathrú ar phá an Airm meastar go bhfuil sé níos oiriúnaí mar dháta cáilithe ná an 1ú Samhain, 1948, an chéad dáta cinnteach a luadh sa Ráiteas Cáinaisnéise do phinsinéirí eile Stáit). Tá pinsinéirí eile faoi na hAchtanna, nach bhfuil a bpinsin gaolmhar do phá an Airm, ag fáil méadú de 7½%.

Tá liúntaisí cleithiúnaigh (lena n-áirítear liúntas is iníoctha do bhaintreach Síniúir Forógra 1916) á méadú, i gcoitinne, de 7½% comh maith ach beidh an ráta méaduithe de 5% i bhfeidhm i gcás liúntais is iníoctha do dhreifiúracha agus leanaí Síniúrí Forógra 1916 agus i gcás liúntais is iníoctha faoi Cuid II d'Acht 1953 do ghaolta fir a thug seirbhís réamh-Shosa agus atá marbh; de bhrí gur socruíodh rátaí bunaidh na liúntas seo i ndiaidh an chéad dáta cinnteach, 1 Samhain, 1948, a luadh san Ráiteas ar an gCáinaisnéis. Meastar gur £17,102 costas bliantúil na méaduithe seo, go léir.

Luadh san Ráiteas ar an gCáinaisnéis go raibh sé i gceist suim bhreise de £30,000 a chur ar fáil lena méadófaí liúntaisí speisialta is iníoctha faoi na hAchtanna do dhaoine ag a bhfuil pinsin as míchumas is inchurtha i leith seirbhís réamh-Shosa, dóibh siúd atá i dteidil pinsean faoi Achtanna na bPinsean Seirbhíse Míleata nó na hAchtanna um na Connaught Rangers (Pinsin) agus do dhaoine ag a bhfuil boinn i leith seirbhíse le heagraíochtaí áirithe nó mar chomhaltaí díobhtha sin. Taréis breithniú mionchruinn a dhéanamh ar an gceist, beartaíodh suim bhreise gar do £75,000 sa bhliain a chaitheamh d'fhonn liúntaisí speisialta a mhéadú, in áit an £30,000 a bhí i gceist i dtosach. Beidh éifeacht ag na méaduithe sin ón 6ú Eanair, 1961 i leith—sé seo dáta tosnuithe na bPinsean nua Sean-Aoise (Ranníocach) faoi na hAchtanna Leasa Shóisialaigh—agus meastar go gcosnóidh na méaduithe £11,000 sa bhliain reatha.

Tugann Alt 24 den Bhille éifeacht dona méaduithe atá beartaithe sna "suimeanna bliantúla iomchuí". Méaduítear iad de £13 sa bhliain ach i gcás amháin, a mhíneoidh mé ar ball, nuair atá £36. 10. 0. de mhéadú i gceist. Comh maith leis seo, tá £1. 6. 0. sa bhreis le haghaidh gach pháiste ináirithe.

Mar sin, gheobhaidh daoine fé 70 mbliain d'aois, péacu pósta no neamhphósta dóibh, méadú ar a liúntaisí speisialta de £13 sa bhliain, nó 5/- sa tseachtain, maille leis an méadú do pháisti ináirithe i gcás daoine pósta. San am gcéanna, táthar taréis athbhreithniú a dhéanamh ar staid daoine in aois 70 mbliain nó ós a chionn ó thaobh na bpinsean sean-aoise (ranníocach). Pinsin neamh-ranníocach a bhí i gceist go nuige seo, agus toisc gurab é feidhm atá ag liuntaisí speisialta soláthar dóibh siúd atá ar an ngann chuid agus nach ceart, mar sin, go gcuirfidís le míchothromaíocht maoine, meastar gur gá, i gcás pinsinéirí sean-aoise, roint athruithe a dhéanamh ar na módhanna a deintear maoin a mheasúnú.

Sé tá i gcéill ná go mbeadh gar do £4 sa tseachtain ag duine pósta in aois 70 nó ós a chionn, idir pinsean (nó pinsin) sean-aoise, maoin eile inmheasúnaithe agus liúntas speisialta. Léireoidh mé é seo leis an gcás is simplí—duine nach bhfuil ach pinsean (nó pinsin) sean-aoise agus liúntas speisialta aige mar mhaoin.

Duine mar sin, go bhfuil pinsean neamh-ranníocach aige ach nach bhfuil ag a chéile, gheibheann sé £3 6s. sa tseachtain fé láthair na huaire idir phinsean sean-aoise agus liúntas speisialta. Ní tógtar a phinsean sean-aoise san áireamh mar mhaoin nuair atá a liúntas speisialta á shocrú. Ní bheadh ach £3 11s. sa tseachtain ag an duine sin dá méadófaí an tsuim bhliantúil iomchuí de 5/- sa tseachtain, mar sin de, tá ráta speisialta—£134—á fhorordú mar shuim bhliantúil iomchuí chun 9/- breise sa tseachtain a thabhairt dó a ardós é go £4 sa tseachtain. Mar a dúirt mé cheana, is ionann san agus méadú de £36 10s. sa tsuim bhliantúil iomchuí a bhaineann fé láthair le duine pósta in aois 70 mbliain nó ós a chionn.

Duine san earnáil seo fé láthair go bhfuil pinsean neamh-ranníocach aige féin agus ag a chéile comh maith, meastar gur fiú an dara phinsean 24/-sa tseachtain mar mhaoin agus sa chás sin tá gar do £3 10s. 6d. sa tseachtain mar iomlán aige idir phinsin chomhshuimithe agus liúntas speisialta. As so amach, ní áireofar ach 19/6d. den dara phinsean, nuair a glactar seo san áireamh maille leis an méadú de 5/- sa tsuim bhliantúil iomchuí, beidh gar de £4 sa tseachtain aige idir phinsin chomhshuimithe agus liúntas speisialta.

Nuair atá duine i dteideal pinsean sean-aoise ranníocach de £2 sa tseachtain agus liúntas breise de £1 8s. 6d. sa tseachtain dá chéile, measfar 31/- den £3 8s. 6d. mar mhaoin agus, toisc an tsuim bhliantúil iomchuí a bheith méadaithe, gheobhaidh seisean gar de £4 sa tseachtain idir phinsin chomshuimithe, liúntas breise agus liúntas speisialta.

Is léir gur feabhas mór a bheidh mar thoradh ar na tairiscintí seo. Beidh liúntaisí ar na rátaí méadaithe iníoctha, ar ndóigh, i gcás ar bith go bhfuil páistí ináirithe ann. Féadfaidh mé a rá, mar mhíniú ar na tagairt in alt 24 de phinsin dalla fé Achtanna na bPinsean Sean-Aoise go mbeidh siad sin ar an dul chéanna le phinsin sean-aoise neamranníocach. Ar an ábhar sin, luaitear iad go sonrach.

Meastar, ó thaobh an £4 sa tseachtain atá ar intinn do dhaoine phósta, go mba chóir ioncam iomlán de £3 2s. 6d. a bheith ag duine neamhphósta in aois 70 mbliain nó ós a chionn, idir phinsean sean-aoise, maoin eile inmheasúnaithe agus liúntas speisialta. Arís, leis an cás is simplí a thógaint mar léiriú—duine neamhphósta nach bhfuil de theacht isteach aige ach a phinsean agus a liúntas speisialta—tiocfar ar an suim de £3 2s. 6d. ag glacadh an mhéadú sa tsuim bhliantúil iomchuí san áireamh, tré 1/- de phinsean neamh-ranníocach 28/6 sa tseachtain agus 12/6 de phinsean ranníocach £2 sa tseachtain a mheas mar mhaoin.

Mar atá léirithe agam, sé cuspóir atá ag na hathruithe seo ná uassuimeanna níos mó a chur ar fáil agus pé michothromaíocht a d'eascair as an mbealach a meastar maoin fé láthair na huaire a léasú. Leis na tairiscintí nua seo méadófar liúntas speisialta gach duine fé 70 mbliain d'aois— aicme iad seo in a bhfuil níos mó ná leath an iomláin—más rud é nach méaduítear a maoin ar bhealaigh eile. Mar an gcéanna dóibh siúd in aois 70, nó ós a chionn, atá i dteideal pinsean neamh-ranníocach agus ortha seo, go bhfios dúinn, tá furmhór na bpinsinéirí sean-aoise ag a bhfuil liúntaisí speisialta. Tá méid áirithe de na pinsinéirí seo, áfach, i dteideal pinsin ranníocach de £2 sa tseachtain agus i gcásanna áirithe i dteideal liúntais bhreise de £1 8s. 6d. sa tseachtain, nuair nach raibh cheana ach pinsean neamh-ranníocach amháin de £1 8s. 6d. sa tseachtain ag teacht isteach. I gcásanna mar seo, in ainneoin méadú ar na suimeanna bliantúla agus measú níos fearr ar an phinsean sean-aoise, laghdófar na liúntaisí speisialta agus i gcásanna áirithe na bhfuil liúntaisí beaga i gceist cealófar iad toisc go mbeidh an ioncam iomlán, ar a n-áirítear an tárdú mór sa phinsean agus maoin eile inmheasta, níos mó ná an uas suim a bheartaitear anois. Ar an dtaobh eile den scéal, beidh roinnt mhaith daoine nach raibh i dteideal liúntais speisialta cheana incháilithe anois de bharr na méaduithe sna suimeanna bliantúla iomchuí, na bealaigh nua ar a meastar pinsin sean-aoise agus na huas-suimeanna nua.

Tá súil agam gur cabhrach mar mhíniú ar an mBille an cur síos atá déanta agam air agus, le linn dom bheith ag críochnú, déanfaidh mé trácht ar aon phointí eile ar gá eolas nó míniú a thabhairt ina dtaobh.

This Bill is mainly concerned with the grant of increases in wound, disability and married pensions and in certain allowances to dependants of deceased persons, payable under the Army Pensions Acts, 1923 to 1960. The increases are effective from 1st August 1960, and in fact are being paid since that date on the authority of a Supplementary Estimate for pensions passed in this House on 20th July, 1960.

The increases dealt with in sections 2 to 23, inclusive, 25, 26, and 27, are broadly in accordance with the increases for State pensioners, generally, authorised by the Minister for Finance in his Budget Statement in April 1960. Officer pensioners whose pensions are related to their Army pay at the date of their discharge are receiving an increase of 7½% if discharged before 1st September 1949, and 5% if they were discharged on or after that date and before 2nd November, 1955. (The 1st September, 1949, being associated with an Army pay change is considered to be a more appropriate qualifying date than 1st November, 1948, the first critical date mentioned in the Budget Statement for other State pensioners.) Other pensioners under the Acts, whose pensions are not related to Army pay are receiving an increase of 7½%. Dependants' allowances (including that payable to the widow of a Signatory of the 1916 Proclamation) are, generally being increased by 7½% also but the allowances payable to the sisters and children of the Signatories of the 1916 Proclamation as well as those payable under Part II of the Act of 1953 to relatives of deceased pre-Truce servicemen qualify for the lower rate of increase (5%) because the basic rates of these allowances were fixed after the first critical date, 1st November 1948, mentioned in the Budget Statement. The annual cost of these increases is estimated at £17,102.

Reference was made in the Budget Statement to the proposed allocation of a further sum of approximately £30,000 to increasing special allowances payable under the Acts to persons in receipt of pensions for disablement attributable to pre-Truce service, to persons eligible for pensions under the Military Service Pensions Acts or the Connaught Rangers (Pensions) Acts and to holders of medals in respect of service with, or membership of, certain organisations. Following detailed consideration of the position, it has been decided to allocate approximately £75,000 a year, instead of the £30,000 originally envisaged, to the improvement of special allowances. These improvements will take effect from the 6th January, 1961, which is also the date of commencement for the new old age (contributory) pensions under the Social Welfare Acts, and the cost of the increases expected to fall as a charge on the current year's Vote is estimated at £11,000.

Section 24 of the Bill provides for the increase of the "appropriate annual sums". These now become higher by £13, except in one instance, which I shall explain later, where the increase is £36.10.0. As well, there is an addition of £1.6.0 a year for each reckonable child.

Persons under 70 years of age, whether married or unmarried, will, therefore, receive an increase of £13 a year, or 5/- a week, in their special allowances, together with the increase for reckonable children in the cases of married persons. The opportunity has been taken of reconsidering the position of persons of 70 years of age or over in the light of the introduction of old age (contributory) pensions. Hitherto, only non-contributory pensions have been involved, and since special allowances are designed to supply for the lack or inadequacy of other means and should, as far as possible, avoid accentuating inequalities in means, certain adjustment of the current methods of assessing means are considered necessary in the cases of old age pensioners.

What is contemplated is that a married person of 70 or over should have by way of old age pension or pensions, other assessable means and special allowance combined, a sum of £4 a week approximately. To illustrate this, I shall take the simplest type of case—that of the person who has no income other than an old age pension or pensions and special allowance.

At present, such a person who has a non-contributory pension of his own, but whose spouse has not, receives by way of aggregated pension and special allowances, approximately £3 6s. a week. His old age pension is completely ignored as means in the assessment of his special allowances. An increase of 5/- a week in the appropriate annual sum would bring such a person up to £3 11s. a week only, so, in order to give him the additional 9/- a week necessary to bring him to £4, a special rate of appropriate annual sum—£134 —is being prescribed. That, as I have said already, is an increase of £36 10s. in the appropriate annual sum at present applicable to a married person of 70 years of age or over.

Where, at present, a person in this category himself has a non-contributory pension and his wife also has one, the second pension is assessed as means to the extent of 24/- a week, and the income by way of aggregated pensions and special allowance is approximately £3 10s. 6d. a week. In future, only 19/6d. of the second pension will be assessed and that, taken in conjunction with the increase of 5/- in the appropriate annual sum, will also bring him to approximately £4 a week by way of combined pensions and special allowance.

Where a person is eligible for a contributory old age pension of £2 a week and a supplementary allowance of £1 8s. 6d. a week for his spouse, 31/- of the £3 8s. 6d. will be assessed as means and he, too, having regard to the increased appropriate annual sum, will receive approximately £4 a week by way of combined pension, supplementary allowance and special allowance.

As Deputies will see, these proposals bring about a very considerable improvement in the present position. Where there are reckonable children, allowances for them at the increased rate will, of course, also be payable. I may add, in explanation of the references in Section 24 to blind pensions under the Old Age Pensions Acts, that such pensions are treated in the same way as non-contributory old age pensions, which is the reason why they have to be specifically mentioned.

In the light of the £4 a week envisaged for married persons, it is considered that, in the cases of unmarried persons of the age of 70 or over, a combined income of £3.2.6 from old age pension, other assessable means and special allowance, would be a reasonable figure. Again taking the simplest case for the purposes of illustration—that of the unmarried person who has no income other than his pension and special allowance— the sum of £3.2.6 will be reached, regard being had to the increase in the appropriate annual sum, by assessing as means 1/- of a non-contributory pension of 28/6 a week and 12/6 of a contributory pension of £2 a week.

As I have shown, the aim of these adjustments is to provide higher ceilings and to remove certain inequalities which have developed as a result of the current methods of assessing means. Under these new proposals, special allowance holders under 70 years of age—and they make up about one-half of the total number—will receive increases in their special allowances, provided, of course, that their means do not increase in other directions. So, in the main, will persons of 70 or over who are eligible for non-contributory pensions only, and they constitute, as far as we know, the bulk of the old age pensioners who are in receipt of special allowances. A number of such pensioners are, however, now eligible for the contributory pension of £2 per week and in some cases for the supplementary allowance of £1.8.6 a week, where previously only one non-contributory pension of 28/6d. a week was coming in. In such cases, despite the proposed increases in the appropriate annual sums and more favourable assessment of old age pensions as means the special allowances will fall to be reduced, and in some marginal cases where the allowances are small, they will cease to be payable for the reason that the big increase in pension, taken in conjunction with other assessable means will bring the total income above the ceiling now fixed. On the other hand, many people who had hitherto been ineligible for special allowances will now become eligible because of the increases in the appropriate annual sums, the revised methods of assessing old age pensions and the higher ceilings.

I hope that the outline which I have given of the contents of the Bill will have proved informative and helpful and I will endeavour to deal, when I am concluding, with any points on which further information or explanation may be required.

General MacEoin

Like the Bill with which we have just dealt this is a Bill legalising what is already being done. It has the further addition of improving the conditions of persons who are in receipt of, who are entitled to, or who may claim special allowances and the appropriate sum, as it is called, is being raised. For that reason it is welcome, that, as the Minister has said, it is an improvement on the existing position, but I think that is all that can be said about it, that it is an improvement. It is very hard to understand, and even those who have experience of it find it hard to understand, how the calculation or the assessment is made to arrive at the appropriate sum. There are very great differences in the position of several applicants who have been refused and who, any reasonably minded person, on examination would say were entitled to succeed. However, by raising the ceiling of the appropriate sum it does bring in a substantial number and increases the special allowance being paid to them. It is an improvement and I welcome it.

I should like the Minister to give some indication—leaving out the old age pension; it is quite clear how the assessment there is arrived at—as to how the assessment is made in respect of a person who has not an old age pension but who has a small bit of land or is residing with a family or something like that. It is very hard to know how the pension officer assesses it. I shall give an example. The Minister has given an example in the Bill of what I mean. A person qualifies for a full old age pension but prior to that he would not qualify for the special allowance and when he gets the old age pension he does not qualify for it either. If the applicant's means are over £100 roughly, he cannot get the full old age pension but supposing it is £104 divided by two in respect of himself and his wife, he gets the full old age pension. The appropriate sum in that case was £52 at the most. In that case the applicant should have received the special allowance up to the time he received the old age pension but he does not. Because he was housed and supported by a son or daughter or some other relative, that is assessed as means. I submit that should not be because it is putting a strain on everybody concerned.

The Minister gave me to understand on the last occasion that if a member of the forces who had a disability pension died, his widow would become entitled to a widow's pension. In a great number of cases that has turned out not to be so and the Minister should reconsider all these cases. It would not cost a great amount to meet them. I have one case in mind which the Minister said does not qualify although it was a wound pension case. The widow is disqualified and left without any means except the ordinary widow's pension which she gets under the Social Welfare Act. I agree that 1949 is a more appropriate date for assessing the Army pensions. It is a pity we could not go a bit further and take a later date. However, I suppose we have to be grateful for small mercies.

I want to impress upon the Minister the necessity not only for increasing existing military service pensions but for dealing with complaints arising from the failure to secure service certificates. I know it is not appropriate under this Bill to say it but when we are dealing with increases for the existing recipients and with increases for disability pensioners it ought to be considered. There is not a Deputy on either side of the House, at least among those who had any association with former days, who is not receiving requests day after day. Time is flying and there are two things the Minister can do in that regard which I commend to him: first, to cater for widows of pensioners who were in receipt of disability pensions and, secondly, to make some provision for the issue of military service certificates. I know the Minister argues that these increases in the special allowance represent compensation and that a person who has a medal is being fairly treated. I admit that is so and that the special allowance is much greater than that to which he would be entitled under the certificate of service but the certificate of service is the badge, the proof of service. The medal, even though it is of monetary value, is not of so much importance as the material fact that the certificate of service puts the stamp of approval upon the service that that person rendered.

Mr. Davern

Deputy MacEoin has raised some points I should like the Minister to entertain favourably. With regard to the special allowance, in 1932 the Fianna Fáil Government by amending the Old Age Pensions Act abolished what is known as means in kind. They abolished the assessment as means of support from anybody regardless of whether it was a relative or a complete outsider. I would urge upon the Minister that means in kind should not be assessable in the granting of a special allowance. It is outdated. It was an old penal assessment and in 1932 we abolished it in regard to old age pensioners. Having done so, it is only in keeping with our policy that we should abolish such assessment in the case of special allowance applicants, If a person is fortunate enough to have support from some relative or wellwisher, that is completely outside the scope of assessment. I would also like to see the special allowance extended to the widows of men who were in receipt of special allowances. Those surviving are in the winter of their lives and are the only monuments that are left of the struggle for independence.

The independence of this country was won very cheaply. I know there was much loss of life, and I am not, by any means, putting a cheap assessment on it but, in the matter of money which we are now discussing, I do not think any other country won its freedom more cheaply. Not alone did these men we are now discussing win freedom for their country, but they were a headline to the whole world of enslaved peoples, and a glowing example of how a country should free itself from tyranny and slavery. Therefore, the men who are so very readily deserving of thanks should not alone be appreciated here, but by every enslaved people in the world.

I should like to see the pensions extended to widows and, over and above all, it is high time some fund were created from which the Department could contribute in certain cases to people with meagre means—I do not like to use the word "poverty". I should like also to see a fund created to defray the expenses of the funerals of old soldiers. The British Army has such a fund. When a British soldier dies, his funeral expenses are defrayed to an appreciable extent out of a fund provided by the British Government. Our soldiers are as deserving of decent funerals as any other soldiers under God's sun.

The service pensions and wounds pensions have already been increased since 1st August last. It is only natural that those of us who at one time held high rank should urge the Minister not to forget that another increase is not only necessary but fully justified. I know the Minister has the interests of the old soldiers at heart. Few members of the House have shown such appreciation of the Old I.R.A. as he has shown. Every Deputy who has the interests of the Old I.R.A. at heart feels that the Minister is deserving of our very sincere thanks.

I should like to join with Deputy MacEoin in asking the Minister to give further consideration to the military service pensions. I should also like to say, in passing, that many soldiers of the Republic were denied pensions because they were not able to make a case, or because of the green-eyed monster of petty political jealousy— which is a characteristic of some of our people—many of our people were denied pensions. The Minister should consider those people at as early a date as possible. Giving them a pension now would not be of any great help to them, but men who can prove to the satisfaction of a board that they gave service, and good service, to the nation, should get so much for each year of service by way of a lump sum. That is the only way which will satisfy them. Many of them will go to the grave with a grudge, and feeling they gave good service but that unfortunately it was not recognised to the extent to which they think it should have been.

I shall conclude by tendering to the Minister on behalf of many Old I. R. A. men the thanks he deserves. I hope and pray that the sympathy for the old soldiers which he has shown up to now, will be shown again in a practical way by an increase in service and wound pensions. Nothing can compensate a man who loses a limb. He should be shown the very first consideration. I hope and trust that many of those men who were turned down for pensions will be given a lump sum with a view to showing a just appreciation of their services to the nation.

Mr. K. Boland

With regard to the point raised by Deputy MacEoin of an ex-member of the Defence Forces who had a disability pension and died, and whose widow did not qualify for the widows' pension arising out of the pension he was entitled to under the Army Pensions Act, the position is that in order that that pension will be payable, it must be established that the person's death was attributable to the disability in respect of which he had the pension. The case Deputy MacEoin has in mind must be a case in which a person died from some other cause.

Deputy MacEoin mentioned that he found it hard to understand the manner by which the means of an applicant for a special allowance are assessed. I answered a Question in the Dáil on 16th February, and I circulated with the Official Report a fairly easily understood statement of the items included in the assessment of means and the items omitted, which I think should be of help to anybody who wants to inquire into the way in which the means have been assessed in any particular case.

He also referred to the taking into account of maintenance by some relative of special allowance applicants and Deputy Davern referred to the same matter. There is provision for ignoring free maintenance, if it can be established that the provision is a hardship on the provider. It is a fact that in some cases a person may qualify for an old age pension and may not qualify for a special allowance. There is a practice in assessing the means of married couples for old age pensions where there are two applications, under which the means of the applicants can be divided into two and a half assessed as against each applicant. In the case of the special allowance, it is the joint income, the total income of the man and wife, that is assessed as means. That is how the anomaly arises.

A number of suggestions were made by Deputy Davern as to how certain relaxations or amendments in the means test could be introduced. There have been some relaxations, and other suggestions can always be considered in future, but I cannot give any undertaking with regard to further relaxations. If the Deputy brings particular points to my attention, I shall have them considered.

Question put and agreed to.

Agreed to take remaining stages to-day.