INALIENABLE LIFE ANNUITIES

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 935, 30 September 1910, Page 8

INALIENABLE LIFE ANNUITIES

DE. FINDIjAY'S ■ NEW SOHEME. '■■ '■ ' AN INTERESTING PROPOSAL. ~ In moving .the; second,reading of the In-.; alienablo Life. Annuities; Bill in I 'the Legislative ! Oouncil , yesterday, ;' the Hon.'!, Dr. Findlay remarked that for the .first' :time -in the history ' of tho British -jurisprudence tliis Bill would give an opportunity'for a father-to'provide for aV-son- or. a ' such' a way that; .the provision .could not be wasted-either bji thoughtlessness or vioiousncss. To leave young man or girl' £2101), possibly at, the 'age-of 26 or 21,. and tD. plaeo that sum in ,tho -haiids: of the'person .raised first the. tempt-ation to; the individual, to waste tho ihoneyi and' secondly,'the': temptation on: the part of. other people.to'help waste it. If,.' instead of a temptation, : an., annuity was created, - which cou}d , not bo -charged, parted with, or ■ assigned, he thought H would- be a great-.ihelp "in providing for' the wants of the rising-igeneration. "■ There was 'probably no .nioro 'pathetic picture thari '. that of an' elderly daughter of a'dead father, who was: strugglin-g and try-.-irig to eke out. a : miserable .existence with music or. some other -little, accomplishment. He had in. mind cases :o£/daughters of. oneo ..wealthy; men,. ,who'; were -left; to struggle, on, scarcely escaping 'Btarvatios. ' Another class the Bill would enable permanent pro-' vision to -be made for \vas, tliG mGnta'lly. or physically, defective. It, offered a strong and salo means' of providing for-.6ucn cases, .and he' thought-.'fathers would welcome it.- - Annuities. could cither be obtained by a cash payment of the lump sum. or by payment hy instalment. ' A- very,, small - cash sum paid ' down, or pa-id annually, would secure "an annuity of £104 per year at. 40' years. o£, age.-,Tho Bill opened, a moan's to any man earning £3, . £4, xu a week to provide ,his son , or' daughter' with an. apnuity,.of ,£2; a week at, say,-tho age; of 30 or; 40 years. l ■ The' Bill .'also pro vided for deferred annuities, and testamentary inalienable annuities. If was passed, it gave a method by whioh the annuitant, was,protected against:his own folly,' or-, again, somebody alse's roguery. The Hon! H. Pr'Wigram' dsked why tho annuity, was 'limited-.-to-"£2/' ~ The; Attorney-General .replied that there .was >"already. considerable' .protection in ,-bankrup'tdy- for- 'wives, and childron, somewhat'at the expense; of "the:,-creditor. If !thd 'amount: was' ■■ allowed.to be".unlimited •it", might open the"door '• to ' defrauding creditors. " . '. The Hon. 8., 0. J.. Stevens (Canterbury) suggested that the term "company," which, in . the. Bill, was made -t: ocoyer lifo insurance companies, and the Government Life Insurance might bo applied to the Government insurance; only;, and allow the Government*.to' control thi matter exclusively., (Hear, hear.) Ho. also thought the jo 2 limit was too .small, and might be enlarged.: It seemed to him that the- Bill would bo of great value.

The Hon. 0. Samuel, (Taranaki) thought the Council should hesitate before it gavis a monopoly to the-State. Competition was desirable if it could'.be safely' limited to those who could be " trusted. to . carry oui the task. ■ The Hon. J. ; E. Sinclair - (Otago) - said he took it that the policies could not be interfered with in any maaner by ihe assured person. • It would, ho thought, be a pity to confine .the- policies to the 'Government insurance, as. suggested by Mr. Stevens. Tho Government office should notf have a monopoly of . the business. The Attorney-General, in reply, pointed out that the Government did not want, to secure to any person tho right to go through .life disregarding. creditors, and ■ at the same ;time having an assured income exceeding': t|;at person's' reas6nablo requirements. That was why the inalienable element-in'the.'Bill had a • limitation. of £2 per week, Anything beyond that eum was not protected. , The. provisions- in - regard to testamentary annuities' were different. Any sum left by will could be converted into an annuity, and the-entire sutn; would 'be protected, but the Supremo Oourt, wag empowered, to declare, after considering the. case, how far the'appointees or legatee should be protected. , The Court was'made a sort of guardian. .He could not express an opinion on. tho point raised'vby.- Mr. Stevens as to the Government Insurance Company having tho business to itself. This was a policy matter which ho would submit to Cabinet. He believed the system of annuities would be largely availed of. if tho Bill was passed. In his opinion, if the Government Insurance had a monopoly,. its. business would be doubled. The Bill was read a second time, and referred to tho. Statutes Revision Committee.''