asked the Minister of Defence whether the review of pensions to widows of officers of the three Services has now been completed.

asked the Minister of Defence if the review of arrangements which will govern the award of pensions to widows of officers of the three Services has now been completed and if he is yet able to announce a substantial increase in their amount.

asked the Minister of Defence if he will now make an announcement with regard to the pensions for widows of officers of the three Services.

asked the Minister of Defence what are the future arrangements which will govern the award of pensions to widows of officers of the three Services; and whether he will now make a statement.

asked the Minister of Defence what has been the cause of the delay of more than a year, since an early statement was promised, governing the terms of award of pensions to widows of the three Services; whether he is aware of the anxiety that this delay has caused; and if he will now make a full statement.

asked the Minister of Defence whether he will now give the reply promised a year ago about pensions to widows of officers.

asked the Minister of Defence whether he is yet in a position to make a statement on pensions to widows of officers of the three Services.

asked the Minister of Defence if he has now concluded the review of officers widows' pensions announced on 12th May, 1948; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Minister of Defence if he is now in a position to make the promised statement on pensions to officers' widows.

asked the Minister of Defence if he is now able to make a statement regarding the award of pensions to widows of officers.

asked the Minister of Defence whether he has any statement to make about the rates of pension paid to officers' widows.

As hon. Members are aware, a review was initiated some time ago into the long established scheme of non-contributory pensions for the widows and orphans of regular members of the Armed Forces. While this review was in progress His Majesty's Government decided to promote a family pension scheme on a contributory basis for all established civil servants. In these circumstances, it became necessary in the interests of the Forces to consider a similar scheme, also contributory in character, for them, which would not, as in the past, be confined to the families of officers and warrant officers, first-class, but would embrace all ranks serving on pensionable engagements. Agreement has been given in principle to the introduction of such a new and comprehensive scheme for the Forces, and details are being worked out as quickly as possible.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it was as long ago as 12th May, 1948, that his hon. Friend the Civil Lord said that a review affecting the widows of officers in the Armed Forces was in an advanced stage, and that a statement would soon be made? Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that the Government should have made some statement, and not have waited for more than a year before making the statement to which we have just listened?

I think that my hon. Friend the Civil Lord was right when he said that the review which we have undertaken with regard to the existing scheme was fairly well advanced, but the review was overtaken by the proposal to have a much more comprehensive scheme upon a contributory basis, and that has accounted for the delay.

May I ask when the people affected will be told what the pensions, will actually be? Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether it was really necessary that it should have taken so long to come to a decision?

I think it was necessary, in view of the general interest of the Forces, once a scheme was to be adopted on a more general and comprehensive basis for the Civil Service, even though on a contributory basis, that the Services should be given at least equal consideration with the Civil Service.

When will the scheme come into being?

I hope very soon. I do not want to fix the actual date because of the very varied conditions in the Forces compared with those of the Civil Service. There are different categories in the different Services, and differences with regard to retirement gratuities, compared with the Civil Service. It takes a lot of working out for the actuaries. I do not want to commit myself to a date, but I am pressing on with the matter as rapidly as possible.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, in the meantime, very great hardship is being experienced by widows of officers who are living on extremely small pensions? Cannot something be done for them?

That is rather a different matter. It is a matter of great interest to a large number of Members of Parliament and great sympathy is involved, but I would remind the House that the general question of the increase of State pensions was dealt with by the House in the Pensions (Increase) Act, 1947. Questions as to existing rates of pensions contracted for under previous service, would have to be dealt with through that channel.

Can the right hon. Gentleman hold out any hope in the matter?

That involves more branches of pensions than Service pensions and such questions should be addressed to the Treasury.

Will the scheme apply to existing widows as well as to those who become widows after this comes into effect?

I would refer the hon. Gentleman to my last answer.

Would it not have been better if the very categorical promise given a year ago had been modified earlier, instead of the present announcement having to be elicited by putting down a Question?

It was in the best interest of the Services and in the interest of backing up conditions and recruitment in the future to follow the course we have done.

Is it not the case that hitherto there have been no pensions whatever for "other ranks" and that it is of the utmost importance that for the first time in the history of the Services, "other ranks" are included in the scheme and pensions paid to their widows?

I agree with my hon. and gallant Friend. The only "other rank" previously included was the warrant officer, first-class.

Has the right hon. Gentleman gone into the figures which show the totally inadequate pensions received by these widows, who are suffering, as I know personally, very great hardship because they cannot make ends meet on their pensions?

I have already explained that these pensions were generally reviewed under the Pensions (Increase) Act, 1947. They fall to be dealt with on the general basis of State pensions covered by such legislation and they must be dealt with through that channel.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the increase under the Pensions (Increase) Act, 1947, was totally inadequate and did not meet what the various beneficiaries thought were their rights?

I have already said that questions on that general basis should be addressed to the Treasury.

In view of the length of time taken to deal with this matter, will the right hon. Gentleman consider making the increases retrospective from a reasonable date?

As a Service Minister I am always anxious to get retrospective dates, but it is not so easy to do that.

Will the right hon. Gentleman at any rate find out for himself, and inform the House, the date when the existing rates of pensions were fixed? He will find that it was many years ago.

I speak only from memory, but I believe the last revision before 1947 was about 1920.