Mr YATES (Adelaide) .- I support the amendment, not with any desire of blocking the Bill or harassing the Government, but because I believe that what it seeks to do for our maimed soldiers is little enough. Prior to going to the war I suggested that the War Pensions Act should be amended to provide that all those who lost both legs or arms, and soldiers who had become blind, should be paid a living wage for the rest of their lives. I have always been considerate of any unfortunate who happened to be born a cripple, and have always maintained that we were uncivilized so long as we compelled blind persons to work to earn a living wage. I am not the most vigorous man in the world, but I enjoy full health, bodily strength, and I regard .the loss of a limb as one of the biggest knock-backs in life. The payment of rent is a handicap even to a man who is healthy and is working for wages, but it is doubly so when it has to be provided regularly out of the small amount that is paid by way of pension to a man who has become incapacitated through wounds received during the war. Therefore I think that those who have done patriotic and noble service which has resulted in their being maimed should be provided with homes. I pay little heed to the suggestion that we have not the money. That was the cry which was urged when war broke out. It was only the other day that I was reading the remarks of a Minister on the question of finance in the early days of the war. It was said that if so much money was taken out of .circulation, industry would be disturbed when the wheels should be kept going, and we found Mr. Fisher timorous about borrowing £20,000,000 in Australia, and calling for £5,000,000 at a time in order that the financial equilibrium might not be disturbed. Yet, since then, we have raised £200,000,000 from the people of Australia, and the trade and commerce of the country have gone on just as vigorously as they did prior to the -war. As the honorable member for Cook (Mr. Catts) has suggested, the money is there lying on deposit available in the financial institutions. Let us take what we want without interest. The Government are welcome to my little bit so long as I have enough to keep me going from week to week. We have heard the honorable member for Brisbane (Mr. Finlayson) stating that he was prepared to pay his £1 or more in order that taxation might be levied in the manner, he suggested. We have heard the honorable member for Hunter (Mr. Charlton) urging that instead of levying an income tax, all incomes over £400 should be taken by the Government. With these practical suggestions before us, we see that the matter of finance should not stand in the way of redeeming the promises we made to the men when they were induced to enlist. They were told that nothing would be too good for them. The least we can do is to take care that they will not be - troubled by landlords, and will always have a home over their heads. War pensions do not make up for what they have lost. The pension granted to a widow with four or five children will not make up for the loss' of the bread-winner. With so many children, she is not likely to have many men making her an offer of marriage, and what we are proposing to offer her in the way of a free house will be little enough as a return for what she has done for the Empire. I shall support the amendment providing for free homes for limbless soldiers and widows of soldiers.