Wairarapa Times-Age SATURDAY, AUGUST 13, 1938. PENSIONS AND SUPERANNUATION.

Wairarapa Times-Age, 13 August 1938, Page 4

Wairarapa Times-Age SATURDAY, AUGUST 13, 1938. PENSIONS AND SUPERANNUATION.

JN their minority report on the Government’s national health and superannuation proposals, the Opposition members of the House of Representatives Committee which was set up to take evidence on these proposals observed that it was a misuse of the word superannuation to call the present proposals a superannuation scheme at all. The only extent to which the plan is universal is that every person having an income must ’ contribute by both direct and indirect taxation towards the cost of the scheme, irrespective of whether he has already made provision for his own security in old age or n0t.... The proposals merely increase the old age pension from 22s 6d a week to 30s a week, and reduce the qualifying age for men to that obtaining for women namely 60 years. In the Bill laid before Parliament yesterday, the position • stated by the minority members of the committee is modified to the extent that provision is proposed for a gradual introduction of universal superannuation. At a general view, this is a definite step towards a! more equitable adjustment of benefits. The step thus taken is very short, however, and the extension contemplated is very gradual. The principal effect of the embodiment in the draft legislation of this modicum of superannuation is to emphasise the fact that the Government’s policy, so far as provision for old age is concerned, is primarily and in essentials merely a liberalisation of the old age pension under a means test. As the Bill stands, men and women who are sixty years of age on April 1 next and are not possessed of an income of more than £1 a week, will be entitled individually to a State pension of 30s a week, or £7B a year, the total permitted income of a married couple being £4. a week or £2OB a year. The qualifying age for superannuation is to be .65 yeans instead of 60 and the initial benefit is to be £.lO a year (3s lOd a week), increasing by £2 10s a year until the superannuation reaches £7B a year. The period required for the attainment of this maximum is a little over 27 years. An individual able to save independently enough to produce a retiring income of £2 10s a week or more at the age of 65 will benefit by the amount of the superannuation payment. Large numbers of people, however, ■ will be better off with 30s a week provided by the State, plus £1 a week derived from their own savings than if they relied solely on their own savings plus superannuation by right. In this important respect the Government’s proposals plainly must tend to discourage saving and independent provision for old age. It will no doubt be agreed almost universally that the most liberal assistance the afford should be given, not only to the aged, but to widows, orphans, invalids and others who need and deserve assistance. If only in order that these benefits may be maintained steadily, however, it is necessary that no undue strain should be imposed upon the economic resources of the Dominion. It is very far indeed from being demonstrated that the Government’s social security proposals as a whole satisfy - this condition and rest upon a safe and assured financial, basis. The contributions of Government spokesmen to the discussion of this vital aspect of the position seem to boil down into an assertion that prosperity is bound to continue. It is impossible to bow to this confident dogmatism without turning a wilfully blind eye upon the experience of our own country and others. On that account an element of uneasiness must mingle, in any thoughtful mind, with whatever pleasure is awakened by the Government’s alluring display of benefits in prospect.