NATIONAL HEALTH SCHEME

Wairarapa Times-Age, 23 September 1941, Page 6

NATIONAL HEALTH SCHEME

(To the Editor) Sir. —In the course of his address last night, Mr Robertson, M.P., saw fit to accuse me of formerly opposing a maternity benefit scheme, and of touring the district uttering a lot of “humbug" about the Social Security Act as a whole. Below are the points upon which I based any addresses I gave. These were published at the time in an article I wrote. I think the impartial mind will acknowledge that in principle they favour both a universal national insurance scheme and a national health scheme (which includes maternity benefits). Any criticism was centred upon the system of financing, the want of co-operation, and the unreasonable nature of certain details of administration. Upon those points 1 see little reason to alter my criticism, though in the interim I refrained from uttering them on account of the war. These facts were known to Mr Robertson, as ho had with him last night a copy of the article I have mentioned in which .were included the sixteen points given below. It is a political device to attempt to confuse detail with principle, but to my mind it is a most unworthy one. The points mentioned were: — National insurance scheme: (1) Money paid in should be a trust fund under non-political management. (2) Costs of the benefits should not exceed the funds available. (3) The funds and benefits should be available as and when required. (4) National insurance should be really national in scope and universal in application. (5) There should be a limit to the amount of "cover” which can be purchased. (6) Contributions and benefits should bo standardised. | (7) Benefits should not be conditional on poverty or necessity, but upon insurance rights. (.8) There should be no penalty for thrift. (9) Those who already pay in to other insurance schemes should not be compelled to pay in twice. National Health scheme: (10) For drawing up the health portion of the scheme there should be co-operation with, not coercion of, the doctors, and the confidential nature of their relations with their patients should be strictly guarded. (11) The experience of New Zealand friendly societies, insurance companies, and of the New Zealand branch of the British Medical Association, should suggest the basis of a sound national scheme. <

(12) In order to ensure that the needy, workless, unfit, etc., should benefit equally: (a) The more fortunate should pay in a larger proportion of income, while receiving only the same benefit; (b) if necessary, a subsidy for the benefit of emergency cases might bo added to the funds by the Government.

(13) To secure stability and financial security, the scheme should begin simply and gradually, and be allowed to grow, i.e., it should be evolutionary not revolutionary. (14) The working out of a safe basis of payments and benefits should be the estimate of an actuary and his figures should not be tampered with. (15) A thorough inquiry should be made into the methods adopted by other countries such as U.S.A.. Britain, Sweden, and Queensland. (16) A truly national health and insurance scheme, acceptable to all moderate-minded people, should be planned, not by party politicians, but by those with a wide experience of friendly society, insurance and National Provident methods, the medical profession, and voluntary organisations, including at least two women. — Yours, etc.,

N. A. R. BARRER Masterton, September 23.