Mr. OLIVER:

I am speaking of the $100.

Mr. OLIVER:

Mr. OLIVER:

I am sorry that on this occasion I find it impossible to altogether agree with what my hon. friend has said. I notice in the newspaper to-day an item stating that the Ottawa Great War Veterans' Association had a meeting last evening and discussed the action of the Government in granting gratuities in lieu of pensions to returned soldiers. The matter was thoroughly discussed, and the 'action of the Government unanimously condemned. My opinion is entirely in line with the view expressed by the hon. member for West Lamb-ton, namely, that in many cases trifling gratuities have been granted where men have suffered a serious permanent disability. That is an abuse of the power of the Pensions Board. It is not the .fault of the pensions scale, nor of the Pensions Committee of last session, nor is it the fault of the Government that framed the Order in Council passed on the recommendation of that committee. It is the administration of the Pensions Board that is at fault. When they disregard the fact that a man is suffering from a disability that permanently decreases his earning power, and give him a gratuity of $25, or $75, or $100 and turn him loose, they are not treating him fairly, or, as the country desires he should be treated. I know of a man who received a permanent injury to one of his

380i

legs, so that he walks through life with a serious limp, and he was given a gratuity of $25.

I know many other cases in which men have suffered disability which did not entirely incapacitate them, but which seriously reduced their earning power or interfered with their possibilities in life. Yet the Pensions Board dealt with these men simply by the payment of a small gratuity. I do not .consider that that is in line with the spirit of the country; I do not think it is in line with the intention of the Government. I know that it is not in line with the views of the committee that had .to do with the drafting of the scale of pensions.

'Mr. REID: The regulations concerning

pensions were made in accordance with the recommendations of a committee of this House. The Board of Pension Commissioners have forms to be filled

in by persons disabled. Upon these

rorms, which may be filled in by a clergyman or a doctor, a certificate is .made as to the condition of the man, whether he has any other visible means of support, and so on. Upon this report the Board of Pension Commissioners act. In a case that occurred in my county, the person who filled in the blanks stated that the man in question had other means of support, and on that report the Board of Pension Commissioners could not do otherwise than act as they did. If representations are made to the Board, however, that full justice has not been done in any given case, the hoard will take the matter up again, reconsider it, and see that justice is done. Pension and gratuity claims are coming in iin large numbers, and they must be dealt with according to the best evidence available in order that settlement may he arrived at as soon as possible. Every case is subject to revision by the Pensions Board; the facts may be re-examined and the conditions again looked into. The Board have special officers to deal with such cases. If any member of -the House or, indeed, any ,person outside of the House hears of a case where injustice was done, I aim satisfied that the Board of Pension Commissioners, upon the matter being brought to their attention, will take steps to see that justice is done. There may be oases where persons would be probably ignorant of the law or, for other reasons, would not he able

to take -up their own cases; it is only fait and right that we should interest ourselves in such matters.

Members of the House and private citizens generally should take every step to see that justice is done to those who are entitled to consideration under this Act. I desire only to emphasize my impression that the Pensions Board are anxious to see that justice is done to all; I know that justice will be done if all these matters are brought to -their attention.

Mr. OLIVER:

I still think that the review within a year was only for the pair-pose of taking into consideration a change in condition.

Mr. OLIVER:

I could not say definitely as to that. The only information I have is what is contained in the memorandum.