I have been asked to advise whether the pension received by Mr A., the husband of a claimant for old-age pension, should be regarded as income within the meaning of the Invalid and Old-age Pensions Act.

Section 26 provides (inter alia) that in the computation of income in the case of husband and wife, the income of each shall be deemed to be half the total income of both.

By the definition of income (section 4 (b)) payments during illness, infirmity or old-age from any trade union, provident society, or other society or association, are excluded from income calculated for the purposes of the Act.

The objects of the Sydney City Mission are 'to give assistance in money or in kind to help the poor and for these purposes to employ and pay missionaries . . . '. The payment to Mr A., who was an employee of the mission, is in the nature of a pension or superannuation allowance. It may be determined at will by the Council of the Mission.

The payments referred to in paragraph (b) of the definition do not, in my opinion, include gratuitous payments of the nature of those received by Mr A. Neither do I think that the Sydney City Mission is covered by the words 'trade union, provident society, or other society or association'.

In order to satisfy the requirements of paragraph (b) the payments should be made by a society or association to one of its members or his dependants and the benefits so conferred should be consistent with the objects of the body and in satisfaction of the rights of the member.

I am therefore of opinion that the payments by the Sydney City Mission to Mr A. are not within the exception and should for the purposes of the Act be treated as income.

[Vol. 16, p. 410]