The Week in Parliament
Our Parliamentary Correspondent writes: Sir John Simon can scarcely have supposed that his announcement on old age pensions would be received with universal enthusiasm, so presumably he was not disappointed. The ratepayers are to be relieved of the burden of augmenting the pensions in necessitous cases, but the proposed adjustment of the block grant may leave them in no better position. It was impossible to tell from the Chancellor's statement whether the pensioners affected were actually to receive a larger income or whether they were merely to be spared the necessity of applying for public assistance. Mr. Attlee and others pressed hard for further enlightenment, but with- out much success. Their persistent supplementaries diverted attention from the second part of the statement, which announced the Government's intention of lowering the age for wives under the contributory scheme to 6o, and also to grant pensions at 6o to insured spinsters. The former con- cession removes an anomaly to which M.P.s of all parties, and especially Labour Members, have frequently called attention. At present an unemployed man receives an allow- ance for his wife as well as for himself. On reaching the age of 65 and becoming entitled to a contributory pension, he loses his right to any benefit or allowance, while no pension is payable in respect of the wife until she too reaches the age of 65. The joint income, therefore, falls from 263. to los. and, where there are no other resources, recourse to the poor law becomes unavoidable. Sir John can at least claim to have mitigated this glaring hardship.
* * * *
Previous page
