1.—14.

60

r G. HOGBEN AND M. FOX.

only on payment of a lump sum of money. .There is no provision for him to accept a reduced pension instead. I need hardly point out that very few people are in a position to pay a lump sum, although they may be willing to accept a reduced benefit by way of equivalent, and I think this has been overloo 1 cd. (xiv.) The only other point is with regard to clause 13, subsection (2). It has been brought up constantly by the witnesses. I myself cannot really understand what is intended by the subsection. Mr. Hogben told us, I think, what is intended by it, but I cannot see that that is the effect of it. I understand him to say that if, for instance, a man is retired on account of ill health at fifty-eight, and he has contributed for, say, twenty years, he will get twenty-two sixtieths—as if he retired at sixty. Is it not so ? )Mr. Hogben : No—" computed as mentioned in the last preceding section." Mr. Fox : But it is not computed as in the last preceding section. There it is computed as if the man were sixty. Mr. Hogben : No—" one-sixtieth part of the total salary paid during all the years of his contribution to the fund." That is the " method of calculation " ; it says " computed as follows." I might say, however, that I think it might be made clearer. But that is the meaning. 119. The Chairman (to Mr. Fox).] You have gone through the evidence, have you not ?—Yes. 120. Will you give us your opinion on this suggested modification of mine—simply your own views as to how it would meet the objections of the teachers ?—Well, of course, this suggestion and Mr. Hogben's are on the same lines. After looking at them I prefer this one, for this reason :it seems to me that the men from forty-eight upwards are the ones who are inadequately provided for by the Bill. The strong feeling among the teachers apparently is that they are the ones who are dealt with hardly ; and this scheme of Mr. Baume's helps these teachers more than the others. The young people from twentythree to thirty-three would get no assistance by this, and they are satisfied. That is as it should be. Under Mr. Hogben's scheme, at the comparatively low age of twenty-eight they would get a material addition—£ll2 10s. Under Mr. Baume's scheme they would get £105, as they would under the Bill, and they are satisfied. That is the point. Why should you increase their benefit if they are satisfied now. The teachers of twenty-eight are perfectly satisfied now. This leaves them untouched. And at thirty-three they are comparatively satisfied. At thirty-three the increase under this scheme of Mr. Baume's is only infinitesimal; under Mr. Hogben's it is material. This scheme only makes it £93, as against £90 under the Bill, while Mr. Hogben's makes it £105. The increases under this suggestion of Mr. Baume's apply more to the higher ages, which I think is an advantage. lam having the liability under this calculated out exactly, and will have it ready by Friday morning. That is all I have to say about it. 121. Mr. J. Allen.'] What would be the cost of Mr. Baume's scheme ?—I do not know. I will let you know it on Friday morning. Mr. Hardy (to Mr. Baume).] Does this proposal of yours, Mr. Baume, deal only with the old teachers who are now in the service ? The Chairman : I am dealing simply and solely with the teachers at present in the service, and endeavouring to meet the objection raised by the various witnesses that those teachers who have been a long time in the service and who will very shortly go out will receive under the Bill a minimum pension of only £52, and that those who subscribe from forty-eight years of age will receive only £52. This scheme of mine provides only for the teachers at present in the service, and under it those who were sixty-three—the average age of retirement—would receive £78. Mr. Hardy : You are specialising, just because the scheme is coming in and hitting hard The Chairman : Hitting hard at the present teachers. Mr. Hardy : You are loading the scheme with over £100,000. The Chairman : No ; £60,000. It is my own idea. I tried two or three ways by which I could meet the objections raised by the witnesses—those of their objections that seemed to be fairly grounded. Mr. Lewis : You have no idea whether what you suggest at the foot of the sheet will meet the deficiency at all ? The Chairman : No. The main point of this scheme of mine is contained in the table. The other part is simply suggestions, based upon a portion of the evidence.