WIDOW'S MITE

Evening Post, Volume CVIII, Issue 151, 23 December 1929, Page 11

WIDOW'S MITE

THE PENSIONS BILL

DEBATE IN COMMONS

QUESTION OF MEANS

(From "The Post's" Representative.) LONDON, 14th November.

Of the 35 amendments to the Widows' Pensions Bill that have already reached the Order Paper, the second, which occupied tho House for several hours on Monday, raises an interesting point:—

Should a widow over 55 years of ago who is entitled to conio within the purview of the Bill, be granted a pension altogether irrespective of what private income she may possess? Tho Conservative proposal was that Bhe should bo excluded if she has an income from some other source of £250 a year or over; but the Government refused to listen on the ground that it would cost far too much —about £50,000 a year, according to Mr. Arthur Greenwood—to carry out the necessary inquiries among tho 500,000 widows who are expected to be affected, and that the inquiries would constitute an "intolerable inquisition.'' Mr. J. E. Eemor (G.) moved to insert "necessitous" before the word "widow." A necessitous widow would be defined by a later amendment as a widow having less than £250 per annum. He wished to exclude widows, who, by receiving legacies, had become rich. Lady Astor seconded a Conservative amendment to insert a "means test." She was ready to show why every necessitous woman in the country—widow or spinster—should receive a pension, but Mr. Young, tho Chairman of Corn- ., niittees, would not allow her to roam so far from the Bill, and, after stopping her more than once, warned her to restrict herself to necessitous widows. She then began to read letters from necessitous widows in her constituency. The first came from a policeman's widow. "She will benefit under tho Bill," interrupted the Minister of Health, and Lady Astor said: "Oh! I am delighted to hear it." Next came a merchant sailor's widow, and Miss Susan Lawrence assured her that this widow also would benefit. "Will *U widows benefit?" demanded Lady Astor, reciting a list of widows whose husbands had been in various occupations. Miss Susan Lawrence jumped up and said, brusquely: "You should read the Bill, and then you will sec who are in and who are out. Then you will be able to send congratulatory letters to your constituents." A TROUBLESOME CHILD. Mr. A. E. Brown (L.): "It is not so easy as that." (Cheers. ) Viscountess Astor (to Miss Lawrence): '*You may understand the Bill; we cannot. lam a simple woman. (Loud laughter.) Are all these widows, many of them necessitous, in the Bill?" Mr. Greenwood explained that he, could not discuss all the amendments to the Bill under one amendment. Lady Astor: "That may be good enough for the men, but it will not ■satisfy me. Miss Lawrence has called me. a child. "Well, I can assure her she •will find this child a very troublesomo one, as she goes on with the Bill. (Laughter.) There are thousands of women iu--tho country waitiug for this Government to redeem its promises. We ■ have heard of the failure of the late Government, that they were blind and had no vision. "When tho Socialists wero in opposition they wejjt from John o' Groats to Land's End." (Laughter.) Mr. Young called Lady' Astor to order. Lady Astor: "Then I shall wring the House with stories of these necessitous women. Cannot we work together to improve this Bill? There is time. The Socialist Government is in for years. (Loud Ministerial cheCrs and Opposition laughter.) We want a little more logic in the Bill, and if we cannot have that, then a little more justice." (Opposition cheers.) Mr. Greenwood pointed out that if a means limit of £250 were conceded, it ■would mean that every widow would have to undergo an examination just to catch an infinitesimally small proportion. Further, it would mean a periodical inspection. That would be a very substantial tax. He doubted whether the number would amount to more than a mere fraction of 1 per cent. When such a large proportion would get through tho sieve, was it worth while going to an expenditure of £50,000 —tho cost of such an inspection —and in addition raising resentment in 99.9 per cent, of the 500,000 eases.. Miss Rathbonc . (Ind., English Universities) objected to means tests because of their demoralising effect. They meant, she said, that a bribe would be given for a mis-statement of income. If such a, test, however, was to be introduced, she suggested that the income tax limit should be adopted, because the amount could be easily checked. Mr. J. Grace (C.) said that the whole attitude of Socialist members on this question was typical of them when dealing with public funds. (Opposition cheei-3.) It was a perfectly reasonable request that only necessitous widows should receive pensions. Captain A. Eden (C.) reminded the Committee that it was the late Government which removed unpleasant inquisition into means. Mr. J. Jones (Soe.) characterised tho attitude of the Opposition as pure cant. The Socialist Party believed in pensions for tbo people without any question as to whether they wore entitled to pensions or not. (Loud Opposition laughter.) Mr. Kelly (Soc.) said the Conservatives wero endeavouring to put the people in question into the grade of .paupers. (Opposition cries of "No!") "UNDER THE GREENWOOD TREE." Mr. Skelton (C.) expressed his strong opposition to a Minister being the sole arbiter as to who should come under the provisions of Clause 1 of the Bill. It was clear that when widows were going to receive for the first time tiliis "rare and refreshing fruit," every «caro should be take2i that' they were sitting under tho Greenwood tree. (Opposition laughter and Ministerial cries of "Oh! Oh!") "Under tho Greenwood tree, That is whero tho widows must bo." (Laughter.) The time had come when tho Committee should decide the means limit to people who had made no contribution to the State. Mr. Greenwood moved the closure, which was'received with cries of "Gag!" from the Opposition benches and cheei-3 from the Government supporters. The amendment was defeated by 248 votes to 133—Government maiority 115. J " THE PENSION AGE. Sir Basil Peto (C.) moved to amend the clause by raising the pensionable age of a widow from 55 to 60. Pensions payable under the clause amounted to something like £81,000,000 of the £100,000,000, which it .was estimated would bo paid under the Bill in the next sixteen years. Industry could not stand the strain.

I'J.r. E. Browa (L.I. ODposins, said

ho and his friends w'auted to fix the age under the clause at 45. He could not see why the Ministry stuck to the age of 55. On the ground of her capacity to work, the ago should be I fixed at 45. Mr. Womersley (C.) wanted to omit tho age-limit altogether. . Miss S. Lawrence (Parliamentary Secretary, Ministry of Health) said she had to admit that a Liberal amendment on the Order Paper to reduce the iwidow's ago from 55 to 45 was extraordinarily attractive, but the Government did not claim to remedy all tho grievances. They proposed to remedy the grievance which was most acute. They had to consider tho financial condition of the country. (Opposition cries of "Oh! Oh" and an hon. member,, '■'Why didn't you think of that at the General Election?" To reduce the age to 45 years would cost the nation £11,000,000 in tho next six years. The proposal of the Government was put forward as an oxpensivo instalment. A WORRIED "MODERATE." Mr. Buchanan (Soc), who described" himself as "terribly worried" about the Bill, said he would crawl to the Government if they would grant a pension to overy widow of tho workingclass. He was perhaps the most moderate member of his party. Ho refused to issue tho orthodox Labour manifesto, because it went too far — beyond what the Government ' could give. He had given his word to terribly poor people. Always he had kept his word, and he would rather give up his salary as a member of Parliament, which was all the income he had, than fail them. _ Mr. Greenwood described the opposition of tho Conservative Party as purely fractious. ■ They had had a series of utterly inconsistent and contradictory amendments. Whatever tho Government did was .wrong. The amendments were put forward with no desire to improve the Bill, but to obstruct it. (Opposition protests.) He gave the Liberals credit for a desire to improvo the measures. Sir Kingsley Wood '(C.) insisted that Ins party had a sincere desire to improve the measure and not obstruct progress. His gorge would rise at the sickly flattery which the Minister of Health poured upon the Liberal Party (Laughter.) .

Viscountess Astor protested against the action of the Minister in describing their amendments as fractious. The right hon. gentleman was lucky to have so many tame tabby eats behind him (Laughter.)

The amendment to increase the a^e from 55 to 00 was negatived without a division.