A BABY BONUS
HOSPITAL BOARD SMESTS £20
SCOPE OF THE ST. HELENS
HOSPITALS
OUT OF REACH OF WORKING MEN
A few weeks ago tho Wellington Hospital and Charitable Aid Board set up a special committee "to consider and report upon tho question of a. State bonus 01 other assistance to parents of families with inadequate incomes." At yesterday's board meeting the' committee reported in the following terms:—
'Jhe Questions submitted to the committee were not very dciinite, in that no details of any State bonus Bcheme or of the conditions regarding eligibility ot -recipients of this or any other nuUtaribe to parents of families were placed before the committee. It has therefore been assumed that a bonus scheme 'would involve payment of a weekly or monthly allowance of a certain amount per child ii. cases where tho earnings 01 the father were below a stated amount. It is also not clear whether the primary object 'of a State bonUB for parents of families ie to induce an increase in the size of families or to assist in the proper maintenance of children where the wage-earner s unable to earn sufficient for this purpose. Probably both ideas underlie the proposals, but the committee has viewed the question from the standpoint ot the welfare of children and parents in regard to provision of. proper shelter, food, clothing, eduoation, and other things necessary to maintain them in reasonable comfort, The committee has also considered the probable influence of public assistance on the recipients, and also the/possible failure, in some cases, of the assistance being used for the- benefit of children or the proper needs ol the family.
"As regards the number of families living in such a condition that the e.arnings of the father should \be supplemented by* assistance from public lunda, the committee has uo reliable information, but lit id of" opinion that some families are living lender these conditions, and that assstance must be given when the need is shown.
'"i'lie committee does not recommend a State bonus scheme ol periodical payments of small amounts of cash to supplement the wages of .the father when his wage is below a' certain amount per week, lor it •> would be impossible to ax definite limits of wages lor those eligible without shutting out some'.slighuy above the limits lixeu. If a limit at 10s. be hxed, what would be the position of the' man earning, say, £> 125.? One would be eligible for a bonus and the other would not. Injustice would arise and there would also be attempts to evade the limit.
"The influence of a periodical bonus on 6ome wagc-eiu'nerß and their families must be considered, Host of them are very thrifty and have a very strong and natural desire that they and their families should lie self-supporting, but there are exceptions. We are of opinion that a periodical bonus would not strengthen the desire to be self-supporting. The committee does not desire to hold out inducements lor people to rely on State aid when they should, under ordinary circumstances, be able to earn sufficient for their support. On the contrary, we desire to see an increasing number of large families growing up under self-reliant conditions. Where, however, through force of circumstances the earnings of • a family are' insufficient, assistance should be, and has been given by*thi& board. "We 'rccomuiend the board to continue giving assistance in these cases according to the needs and circumstances of eacn case after inquiry .by a standing committee appointed by the board. "We are of opinion that one standing committee should control all the financial and general assistance to the needy, and recommend that the members of the present Charitable Aid Committee be appoint, 'ed for the .purpose, the title of the committee to bo the 'Social Welfare Committee.' "We recommend that the Government be asked to establish the payment, upon application, of a maternity bonus of £20 fov each legitimate child born when tho income of the family does not exceed £300 per, annum, and that the scope of St. Helens maternity hospitals be extended to persons whoso income does not exceed £350 a year. "The committee is of opinion that a social insurance fund, to which the employee, employer, and the Government should contribute, would be of mnterial assistance to families during periods of distress arising from aiclinees, accident, or other causes." Mr. C. M. Luke congratulated the committee on its work, and said • that its conclusions were fair and "reasonable. He moved that the report be approved.
The chairman Isaid there were 'two points lie would like the board to consider with a view of urging them upon the Government. Recently the Soci.ety for the Protection of Women and Children forwarded resolutions to the Prime 1 Minister suggesting a bonus for children, that' was, a bonus for every child t<, be paid on demand every year or every month as the case might be. There, were, he was afraid, wide differences oV opinion on such matters. The Hospital Board had a great deal of experience one way and another in handling such cases, and it was believed that a more beneBcihl way of meeting the' case would be by * a # bonus of .£2O at birth for ?11 parents whose income did not exeeetd .SHOO a year. The other point he wished to draw attention to was the desirability •of extending tile scopi of the St. Helens hospitals. At present cases were taken only when the income of the husband was i2OO and under. lit thought that such a limit was too low. He did not know whether these hospitals should not be tliorwn open to all, as wert the general hospitals, or perhaps they might make the limit .£4OO a year.
Mr.' C. H. Chapman said lie knew of cases where the wives t of working men had been refused admission to St. Helens Hospitals, because the husband was earning over JE2OO. A member: The limit shuts out most working mflfi to-day. The chairman said that, lie would move that the income limit be raised to .£356 in the case of St. Helens hospitals materiiitv cases. The board agreed to the, proposal? anu fncluHed it in the report, which was adopted.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19201029.2.61
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Dominion, Volume 14, Issue 29, 29 October 1920, Page 8
Word count
Tapeke kupu
1,037A BABY BONUS Dominion, Volume 14, Issue 29, 29 October 1920, Page 8
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Dominion. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.