A SPECTATOR 'S NOTEBOOK
THE unkind remarks I made the other day about Disability Pensions for ex-Service men moved the Minister of Pensions to send the Editor a copy of some " Notes on War Pensions." These, in so far as they refer to Disability Pensions, seem to me to strengthen my argument, which was (if you remember) that the 1946 increase of ro per cent. on the 1919 basic rate of 4os. for a totally disabled private soldier was scandalously inadequate in a country where the basic wage rate has gone up by 64 per cent. in the last seven years. The Notes draw attention to a number of allowances which are now more generous than they were • 28 years ago ; I read, for instance, that a too per cent. disabled private soldier with a wife and two children is entitled to 75s. a week, which " represents an increase of nearly 20 per cent. over the 1919 rate." Throughout the Notes the 1919 rate is the only yardstick used and I can quite understand that it looms very large and important in Whitehall. But I can't for the life of me see that it matters in the least to anyone except civil servants what Disability Pension was paid after the 1914-19 war, or the Crimean War, or any other war. Surely the object of the scheme ought to be to make quite certain that men and women disabled in the service of their country can lead reasonably comfortable and happy lives under existing conditions. And can you ensure this without any reference—none appears in the Ministry's 54 pages of Notes—to the cost of living?
* * *
Previous page
