NEWS OF THE WEEK
THE issue of _thet-neVr White Paper on War Pensions shows the Government to have been properly responsive to the strong representations made to it in Parliament, notably by that vigilant guardian of Service men's rights, Sir Ian Fraser. One more rebuttal of the charge that the House of Commons has become a purely otiose body is thus provided. The Government's difficulties must be recognised. While it desires to be generous it must not be prodigal with public money, and if war pensions are to be based on the cost of living they will be lower than those awarded during the last war. But it is in fact not tolerable that they should be lower than those awarded in the last war, and it is not tolerable that when a man is passed into the Army as fit he should subsequently be refused a pension on the'ground that his disability was due to pre-war causes. Both these defects have been remedied. The pension-rates have been substantially raised, and against the new scale no just complaint can lie. An attempt may still be made to amend the wording of the clause about proof of disability, but the White Paper removes both the qualifying adverbs in the formula " directly attributable to, or materially aggravated by," service. It is made dear, moreover, that when an appeal is made to a war pensions tribunal the onus of proof will lie on the Pensions' Ministry, not on the claimant. Sir Ian Fraser has given a guarded welcome to the new proposals, and his attitude to them will be generally shared.
