PENSIONS ADMINISTRATION. (To THE EDITOR OF THE " SPECTATOR.")
SIL—For those who turn away wearied from comic opera some relief may be obtained from a study of the lucubrations of the Ministry of Pensions, particularly if sidelights are thrown on them by the reader's knowledge of the results they entail, and of the unentailed results which follow from a humorous administra- tion.
The Ministry has made a serious endeavour to steer its ship between the rocks of opposed opinions, and in doing so seems to have lost any clear idea of the course it intends to steer, except so far as avoidance of these rocks is concerned. The " Prefatory Notes" to the "Instructions for the Assessment of Alternative Pensions " open on a note of comfortable satisfaction, in that the Ministry has found a well-discriminated via media between the flat rate for ordinary pensions, which is abomination to the Trade Unions, and the rate based wholly on a discharged soldier's• loss of pre-war earning-power (and not at all on his record as a soldier nor on the obligation to enable him to live in decently good conditions with his family after discharge, whether or not he was able to do so under pre-war conditions), which is an offence to most other people.
The Ministry has accordingly discovered an "estimated degree
of disablement or loss of general working capacity," which is to have no reference to the man's " capacity for earning a liveli- hood," and which when applied to an arbitrary fixed sum of 27s. Gd., awarded for total disablement, is to give a man the mini- mum—and generally also the maximum—pension he is entitled to. Thus a man awarded a 50 per cent. disability pension gets 13s. 91.
a week for himself, or himself and his wife, without children. We are clearly told not to infer that he can earn the other 13s. 9..1. and make up 27s. 6d., still less that be can earn half a normal wage. The 50 per cent. disability represents "loss of general work- ing capacity," whatever that may mean. Personally I think it means nothing coherent. Moreover, when there are children, a 50 per cent. disability pension carries with it only half of the ehildren's allowances. Thus a man with a 50 per cent. disability pension and no children is much better off than a man with the same pension and several children, as the latter has to earn a good deal more than the former in order to reach the same standard. The fact is that the percentage awarded, to be of any use at all, ought to mean one of two things—viz., either that the man is able to earn at least the difference between full disability pension and the amount actually awarded for himself and his children, so as to bring him financially to the level of the wholly disabled, or else it should be a definite percentage of full earning- power.
The Ministry seems to have fallen into the same pit as the Pragmatists, who have established usefulness as a standard of truth, but have omitted to ask themselves the question : " Useful- ness to what end?" The Ministry has omitted to ask itself the questions : " Disabled for what purpose?" or "Disabled from doing what? " " Disabled from earning a full wage? " or " Dis- abled from earning the balance of the sum awarded to the wholly disabled? "—two quite different standards of achievement. I admit that in the majority of cases men can earn considerably more than the difference between the amount of their pensions ant that of a full disability pension, but there are a good number in v:hich they cannot earn as much. My o'...jection is that there are no definite principles upon which the award of minimum pensio is is based; neither cost of living nor ability to earn is a decisive factor, and the one consideration which is put forward as the decisive basis—viz., " loss of general working capacity "—is a mere figment of the imagination, is quite indefinable, and of no value at all for any purpose. I refer, of course, to the ordinary pensions, which form ,the large majority, and not to the alternative pen- sions, which are awarded, so far as my experience goes, to a small minority.
In the case of the award of these alternative pensions, it is very difficult to follow the workings of the Ministerial mind. They are intended apparently to enable the disabled soldier to live about es well as he did before the war; but, if so, why take as a standard pre-war earnings in money of which the value has entirely changed? On the other hand, if the object is sot to enable the man to live about as well a; he did before the war, why drag in the pre-war earnings in money as a standard P Can it be that the Ministry wishes to pose as restoring the men to their pre-war position while not really doing so at all? Again, what is the use cf the carefully thought out steps to be taken with a view to ascertain a man's earning-power unless then is also an agreement with the Trade Unions that a man shall be allowed to accept employment on the basis of his earning-power ? A man has said to me: "If I take up that job my Society will say I am a blackleg."
As to the more or less inevitable hardships that occur in dealing with numerous cases, and especially the hardships inflicted in nerve eases by insufficient allowances or complete stoppage of allowances to men admittedly far from recovered, that is another
Previous page
