asked the Minister for Social Welfare whether women whose husbands have disappeared for periods in excess of twenty years can be deemed eligible for widow's pension, if qualified in every respect save for proof of their husband's death.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Widows' Pensions.
24.
Women whose husbands have disappeared for periods in excess of 20 years cannot be deemed eligible for widow's pension, if qualified in every other respect, by reason of that fact alone. However, applications for a widow's pension in such cases are carefully considered on their merits and a pension is awarded if the evidence available is considered sufficient to warrant the reasonable presumption of the husband's death.
Is the Minister aware that there are in his Department a very large number of cases of this character in which it has been impossible to produce evidence of the nature to which he refers, evidence deemed to be conclusive of the husband's death? By reason of that, these women are apparently permanently deprived of ever having access to the widows' pension code because they will never be able to prove their husbands are dead.
It is not necessary to produce conclusive evidence. As I said in my reply "if the evidence available is considered sufficient to warrant the reasonable presumption of the husband's death" a pension can be granted. There are, in fact, cases on record where pensions were granted, and the husband subsequently materialised.
Coming back to live on the pension, were they?
This is a serious matter. I know a number of women in this position in my own constituency. If the Minister examines his records he will find that, for every pension so granted, 50 or 60 applicants are rejected. Where a woman is of pensionable age, and her husband disappeared 40 years ago, that cannot be accepted by the Department as presumptive evidence of death. It is now quite manifest that no such evidence can ever be produced of a character that will bring that woman within the pensions code. There ought to be some provision whereby a protracted period of disappearance will be accepted in itself as evidence of death to enable the woman to qualify for the widow's pension.
Every case is dealt with on its merits. The proportion is a great deal higher than the Deputy said. My information is that it is at least one in twelve.
Even one in twelve. If there are 11 persons in these circumstances——
The husbands probably are not dead.
It is easy to be jocose about this matter but it is a genuine problem in rural Ireland. If we have 11 cases of women who should have the widow's pension and who never can have it——
Who says they should have it?
I say it.
How do you know they are widows?
If there are 11 cases of women in circumstances similar to those of widows bereft of their breadwinners and no longer able physically to earn a living, I suggest to the Minister that the circumstances of these people should be reviewed properly and some steps taken to make the benefits of the widows' pension scheme applicable to them.
There is a well-known legal procedure for presuming death.
It costs money.
We do not insist on absolute proof, but these pensions can only be awarded to widows. Surely it is reasonable that the Department should insist on having some reasonable grounds to presume that the husband is, in fact, dead and the claimant is, in fact, a widow. Every case is examined on its merits and a number of pensions have been granted.
Is the Minister aware——
Obviously we cannot take this any further.
Is the Minister aware that there is under the common law a procedure for getting presumption from the courts of the death of a spouse, but that is an extremely expensive procedure?
Not very.
It is, for a person who has no means. All I am asking is that a woman who has not heard from her husband for 40 years should get a widow's pension.
Your question says 20 years.
He might be alive. The Deputy is putting a premium on desertion. Is the Deputy aware of that?
Go fish! Imagine a man deserting his wife in anticipation of her getting a widow's pension 40 years later. The Minister for Health is daft.
She might drive him to it.