The Patea Mail. Established 1875. WEDNESDAY, APRIL 11, 1883. THE RESULT OF MAJOR ATKINSON’S SCHEME.

Patea Mail, Volume VIII, Issue 1020, 11 April 1883, Page 2

The Patea Mail. Established 1875. WEDNESDAY, APRIL 11, 1883. THE RESULT OF MAJOR ATKINSON’S SCHEME.

So far as can be seen at present, Major Atkinson’s compulsory insurance and extinction of pauperism scheme is not approved of by the Colony, and if brought forward as a Ministerial measure in Parliament in the coming session, is almost sure to result in a defeat of the Ministry. Scarcely a paper anywhere unreservedly approved of it, and all the Opposition journals arc dead against it. Yet after all, it is a very creditable proposal, if only because it is a just proposal and a definite one. The position of the whole question of providing for pauperism, and of supporting our hospitals and benevolent asylums, is.this : we have only at present a choice between three methods of meeting the difficulty. The first of these, is to attempt nothing fresh, but continue the old plan of private subscriptions, supplemented by Government grants, the management being left in the hands of elected committees representing the subscribers. That this might be made to work decently well, is clear from the fact that it has actually been in force for many years, and has not been found intolerably bad, especially as the meetings of the Committees have almost necessitated the presence of the reporters for (he Press, who are as a general rule quite ready enough to pounce down on any real abuses and expose them. It might be advisable that the Government, as finding part of the funds, should be represented on these committees by a nominee member in each case, but that is only a matter of detail. The second method of dealing with the subject is that of complete subordination to the Government of the day, the funds being provided entirely by the Government or by local rates. This is the English PoorLaw system and is by far the worst of aiiv yet devised. It has proved a fruitful source of jobbery, favouritism, oppression, and fraud, has been condemned by almost every British statesman of note in this century, and would be at once abolished if it were possible to find a remedy of any feasible kind. The third scheme is Major Atkinson’s compulsory National Insurance scheme. If of the first two plans one is unpopular, and the other thoroughly bad, this is the only definite alternative. We leave out of the question the foolish proposals of Mr Montgomery and MrM. W.Green, 7 as unworthy of detailed consideration, frpm the fact that they are both of them mere modifications of the English Poor Law with some few additional objections added, and the main reliance of the projectors is placed on the force of the cuckoo cry of settling the people on the lands, as if that was not the very thing the colony had been trying to do with all its might ever since it was founded. The other three schemes we have enumerated are all of them distinct and definite plans ; these last are not. With regard to Major Atkinson’s, it is certainly in its favour that in the only Conference of Friendly Societies on the subject, that at Dunedin, these bodies, which have served more than anything else to ward off the evils of pauperism, expressed their general adherence to the new proposals. Still, the opposition to them is so general, that whether the Ministry stake their existence upon them or not, when they come up tor discussion in Parliament they are not likely to be carried. And then, when they are rejected, there is nothing else for men of common sense provisionally to do but to acquiesce in the stains quo. And few people would really be grieved if that were to be the result. It is easy enough to propound wild and visionary plans for the extinction of pauperism, and to string together clap-trap phrases on the subject; but it is doubtful if the desired end can ever be gained except by a weight of taxation and an interference with personal liberty which will not be tolerated. Young people of both sexes will not pay £6 or £7 a year annually for five or seven years if they can possibly avoid it, when all that they can anyhow get in return for this heavy expense will be the knowledge that they will not be utterly destitute and a burden to their country at some indefinite time afterwards. At that time of life they are confident they never will be in that position, and anyhow they don t care to pay such a heavy taxation with a prospect of reaping so little advantage. And for that and other reasons these will « rather bear the ills they have than fly to others that they know not of.” Besides this, the existing system is not, after all, such a very bad alternative. Pauperism and destitution are provided for by it; benevolent people have scope for their benevolence; and people not overburdened with money need not pay, unless they can afford it. The English mind is said to be intensely conservative. Perhaps it as well that it should beso ; at any rate so far as this, that it is as well not to go in for important changes until it is clearly seen what advantages are to be gained. For it is very certain that changes for mere change sake are bad. On the whole we believe Major Atkinson’s scheme will end in smoke, but it will indirectly have done much good, by calling people’s attention to a very important difficulty which has never yet been satisfactorily solved, but perhaps may be at a future date.