OLD AGE FINANCE

Wairarapa Times-Age, 2 September 1938, Page 5

OLD AGE FINANCE

HOUSE DISCUSSES PENSIONS & SUPERANNUATION RETENTION OF EXISTING SCHEMES URGED BY OPPOSITION MEMBERS (By Telegraph—Press Association.) WELLINGTON, This Day. The suggestion that as existing supperannuation schemes ’provided for a considerable part of the population, the new scheme outlined in the Social Security Bill should be dropped, and an enlargement of the present schemes undertaken, was made by Oppositiorf speakers during discussion in the House of Representatives last nignt. One member said that there were already probably 80,000 persons in voluntary private or semi-private schemes. The Leader of the Opposition, the Hon Adam Hamilton, opened the discussion oy saying that the scheme in the Bill could not properly be called superannuation, as there was no trust fund into which contributions would be paid. The success of the scheme depended on the success or otherwise of control of Government finances from year to year. There should be a clear understanding of the distinction between a social service and superannuation. Mr S. G. Holland (Opposition, Christchurch North) suggested that the superannuation fund should be kept quite separate from the rest of the scheme. “The Minister has so far entirely failed to give us any idea of what the scheme is going to cost,” he said “He has told us that it will cost £600,000 in the first year, but what about the fifth or the tenth year? It would'be a great load'off the minds of the people and off the minds of many Labour back-benchers, too, if we could get some assurance that eventually toddlers are not to be taxed.” Mr W. J. Polson (Opposition, Stratford) said that as nearly as he could estimate on the latest available figures, there was nearly 70,000 contributors to superannuation schemes organised by public and semi-public departments. Beside these, there were probably easily 10,000 more in schemes run by private firms, banks and public bodies. There were 102,000 people in New Zealand over the age of 65, so that left only about 20,000 to benefit. Mr J. Hargest. (Opposition, Awarua) said the Government would have done better to have left existing schemes alone. Contributors to these schemes were not keen on the new Bill because they knew that they could get no more out of it than they were getting from existing schemes, and they knew that the existing schemes were safe. They realised that the Government was embarking on a very dangerous venture, and preferred to remain in their present schemes. Young people were disturbed, said Mr A. C. A. Sexton (Independent, Franklin), because they realised that only as much could be paid out of the scheme as could be paid into it, from taxation. They also realised that witn> the increasing proportion of aged people in the population, the burden on the workers would become correspondingly heavier. Mr H. S. S. Kyle (Opposition, Riccarton) said that the actuary’s report showed that a time would come when 66 per cent of the population was over the age of 60. What would be the cost of the scheme then? he asked. In reply, the Minister of Finance, the Hon W. Nash, said that the Government would like to give universal superannuation now, but that was not possible. It would be, as the Government organised the country and increased production. The evidence of past years showed conclusively that production would increase sufficiently to support the scheme. Mr Holland: “Aren’t you going to say anything about raising the money?” The Minister replied that he had already given details.