SOCIAL SECURITY

Wairarapa Times-Age, 20 June 1938, Page 7

SOCIAL SECURITY

GOVERNMENT’S PROPOSALS OUTLINED STATEMENT BY PRIME MINISTER BENEFITS TO THE COMMUNITY “In the Government’s plan for health benefits we aim to banish another fruitful cause of distress and suffering, the heavy load of medical and hospital expense, which may at any time fall without warning on any family in the country,” observed the Prime Minister, the Rt Hon M. J. Savage, when discussing the Government's social security proposals at a Labour Party reception in the Municipal Hall on Saturday night. Statistics compiled overseas, he added. showed that on the average an unlucky sixth of the people paid in any year about half the total sickness bills paid by the whole community, and a still more unlucky tenth of the people paid 41 per cent of the total billmore than four times their share.” Mr Savage said it was impossible for a family on a low income to budget for such a contingency. The only sensible way to make provision for all those risks was by group insurance and the magnificent service of the Friendly Societies had shown what could be accomplished. Unhappily, far too many citizens were not covered at all, and the Government intended to make provision -for everybody, acknowledging the pioneer work of the Friendly Societies, and accepting gratefully their approval and offer of cooperation. By a community-wide scheme, the Government would be able to spread the costs, now falling on the unhappy few in any one year, ovei’ the whole population and over the whole working life of each individual. It was insurance on a complete scale for a premium that no insurance company in the world could compete with. “Here is the insurance policy,” he continued, “we offer to you for a premium of Is in the £, only 4d more than you are now paying for unemployment alone. “If you become unemployed, a payment for yourself and your dependants until you regain employment. “When you fall sick provision for yourself and your dependents until you recover. “If you are permanently incapacitated by accident, illness or blindness, an increased benefit to keep your family and yourself. ' “If you die while your family is young, an increased benefit will be paid to your widow and children. “Even if there are no young children your widow will be provided for. “Orphan children will be placed with relatives and other foster parents, who will be paid enough to support the children. “If you have more than two children you will qualify for a much more generous family allowance to help you provide for them. “Some people in need will not actually qualify for any of these benefits, but they are still covered by the policy, 'and will get the disability benefit. “Right through your life you and your family will have at your service free of charge a complete general medical practitioner service, a hospital and sanatorium service, all necessary medicines and appliances, maternity treatment either in your own home or in 3 maternity home, and mental hospital treatment. “Those who have the misfortune to be disabled by miner’s phthisis or other occupational disease will benefit by an increased miner’s pension. War veterans, whose earning capacity has been reduced, will receive more generous allowances. “This list of new benefits and increases, with the added expenses of administration, has just used up that Is premium for our insurance policy, but the Consolidated Fund is to make its contribution. Tn our policy we promise to make provision that you will not want when you reach the riper years, and cannot carry on in your normal work If your own savings or other provision' do not bring in £2 10s per week for a single man ox - £4 for a qualified married couple, then you will be entitled to all or part of the benefit, which is greatly in excess of the present old age pension of 22s 6d, which will be increased to 30s from April 1, 1939.” “I am sure that those people who asked fox - a definite cash return for their contributions did not really understand what that would involve. In plain words they ask either' that the contribution should go up to Is 3d ox' Is 6d in the £, or that something should be taken from the widow, the oldexpeople without resources, and the invalid, and given to themselves. This Government will never be party to such a proposition. We have always fought against penalizing the pensioner, and I cannot believe that those witnesses before the Committee want that either. “These benefits that I have spoken of are set out in the Government’s original proposals. Since they were prepared we have had the advantage of hearing evidence from many people who are anxious to help, as well as from some others. I cannot yet divulge the contents of the Committee's report, but I can say that the Government hopes to make some of the benefits even bettei' when the Bill is drafted.” THE INCOME LIMIT MR SAVAGE'S OPERA HOUSE ADDRESS. AN APPARENT SLIP. In his address at the Opera House on Saturday evening, the Prime Minister spoke of the permitted total income for a superannuated married couple and said this was now to be £4OB a year. From Mr Savage’s later address in the Town Hall, it appears that his mention, in the Opera House, of £4OB, was an error, and that the

figure stated should have been £2OB a year —i.e., £3 a week superannuation and £1 a week of permitted income ovex’ and above superannuation. Having said, in his Opera House address, that during the coming session Parliament was going to pass legislation dealing with national health and superannuation, Mr Savage continued that, under their proposals, no married couple, on reaching the age of sixty, would get less than £3 a week after April 1 of next year. He had not thought that he would have lived to have an opportunity of establishing that. Undei' the health scheme, every household in New Zealand would have medical practitioner' services at call. Why should people worry if they did not need medical service, ox' had enough money to get on without the £3 a week? He looked to the time when they would have universal superannuation for everybody in New Zealand, but they had thought it right to begin where the Great Teacher began nearly two thousand years ago—among the poor. All His philosophy was addressed to the poor. “And if in a very humble and modest way I find myself following in His steps,” said Mr Savage, “well, I won’t have lived in vain.”

The Premier went on to express an opinion that the superannuation proposals would benefit about 80 per cent of the people of the Dominion. He had not gone fully into the figures, he said, but they were broadening the scheme as compared with the proposals submitted to the Parliamentary Committee and would reach people with incomes not above £4OB a year. A married couple, of superannuation age, would not get less than £3 a week, and anything else that they could earn up to a total of £4OB a year. There was nothing in legislation in any other’ part of the world to compare with this. The main objection was regarding people paying in and never drawing anything out, but people who paid into a lodge were not sorry if they never had to draw anything out. Mr Savage said that looking back through old newspaper files of the ’nineties, he had found that the papers then accused Seddon, much as they now accused the present Government, of destroying thrift and confidence and everything worth while, but he maintained that Seddon was one of the finest men who had ever' occupied the Prime Ministership of this country. (Applause). ERROR CORRECTED. STATEMENT BY MR SAVAGE. (By Telegraph—Press Association.) WELLINGTON, This Day. The Prime Minister, in a statement issued today, said his attention had been drawn to a slip he had made in speaking at Masterton on Saturday. “I stated,” said Mr Savage, “that in the social security plan originally proposed by the Government the total income of a married couple, including superannuation, would be up to four' pounds a week, that is £2OB pei' annum. I am reported on one, occasion during the speech to have referred to this maximum as £4OB per annum. This is obviously incorrect and I have to thank the Press Association fox’ drawing my attention to this error."