We use Google Analytics to see which pages are read and how the site is used, so we know what to improve. This only runs if you accept. See our privacy notice for details.

Dáil

CEISTEANNA—QUESTIONS. ORAL ANSWERS. - ARMY PENSION APPLICATIONS.

EAMON O DUBHGHAILL

asked the Minister for Defence if he can state the reason why a pension under the Military Service Pensions Act, 1924, has not been granted to Mr. John Love, Clough, Castlecomer.

Comment on this
Peter Hughes MINISTER for DEFENCE (Mr. Hughes) Cumann na nGaedheal

A pension has not been granted to Mr. Love for the reason that he did not establish to the satisfaction of the Board of Assessors that he gave the minimum amount military service required by sub-section 4 of Section 2, of the Military Service Pensions Act, 1924. The finding of the Board on the available evidence is final and conclusive. Mr. Love's application can be re-considered only if he furnishes additional evidence in support of it. He has been so informed.

Comment on this

What is the minimum of military service required to satisfy the Board? We want to know that.

Comment on this

Mr. Love was told the period was from 1st March, 1920, to 31st March, 1921, or the period from 1st April, 1921, to 11th July, 1921.

Comment on this
EAMON O DUBHGHAILL

asked the Minister for Defence whether the application of John McNamara, the Quay, Graiguenamanagh, for a pension under the Military Service Pensions Act, 1924, has yet been considered.

Comment on this

Mr. McNamara's application was considered and disallowed as he did not satisfy the Board of Assessors that he rendered the minimum amount of military service required by sub-section (4) of Section 2 of the Military Service Pensions Act, 1924. He has, however, submitted what purports to be additional evidence in support of his application. On this evidence I have requested the Board to re-open their findings in his case.

Comment on this