The Press. MONDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1899. THE OLD AGE PENSIONS ONCE MORE.

Press, Volume LVI, Issue 10264, 6 February 1899, Page 4

The Press. MONDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1899. THE OLD AGE PENSIONS ONCE MORE.

It musj; be apparent now to everyone that our boasted Old-Age Pension scheme is but another form of general aid. The public examination in the Court belies the preamble to the Act. The preamble says —"Whereas it is equitable that de- " serving persons who during the prime " of life have helped to bear the burdens "of the colony by the payment of taxes " and to open up its resources by their " labour and skill, should receive from the " colony a pension in their old age." But the Courts do not grant a certificate for a pension, however deserving the old settler may be, unless he or she is poor. If they even have saved a little that is considered, and if they own £320 worth of property, no pension certificate can be obtained. So if they make a £1 a week no pension is bestowed. If a person earns £40 a year his pension is £12 only, and so on. The pension is therefore only~a pension to the poor, and that is another name fof charitable aid. That it is so regarded by most of the applicants is shown by their shrinking from publicity. If the pension were in reality a reward to "deserving colonists," they would esteem it an honour to have their names mentioned in the papers. In Wellington the names have been published, the papers there contending that this is desirable as a safeguard against imposition, and they further urge that the claimants ought not to object, seeing that, according to the preamble of the Act, they are in reality singled out for honour by the State. The poor old people look at it in. a different light, and we are not surprised at it. To lay bare their poverty in a public Court, to be asked tf they ever get drunk or have been in gaol, is a curious way of being honoured as "deserving colonists," even if they do get a

dole of a shilling a day in the end. For our part we decline to add to the humiliation of these poor old people by publishing their names, and it would require strong proof of gross abuse of the Act before we should consent to depart from this rule. Eren now, many estimable and poor persons will sooner go without the pension than appear before the Court to ask for it, and we expect that this feeling will prevent many persons who are entitled to a pension from receiving it. Those who have been idle and dissolute, and who are careless of their good name, and have even received charitable aid for years, will receive it without any feeling about its being charitable aid. And in many instances pensions will go to the least, worthy.

We may notice that the introduction of the provisions of the Act, the framing of regulations and the passing of the claims, have been so delayed that few payments will come into this financial year. The Treasurer wants his credit balance to appear large, and the payment of the pensions will be delayed as long as possible. \\ c doubt if even two monthly payments will be made in the financial year.

The subject of paying pensions is still we see engaging the attention of sociologists and others in Europe, and there is a general consensus of opinion that no State can afford to do what we have agreed to do. Even the most ardent advocates of pensions see great danger ahead if such a burden as we have by our Pension Act cast on the colonial revenue were cast on the revenue of any European country. The cry for pensions is an outcome of that impatience with slow and sure reforms that is characteristic of our day. We will not wait for growth or evolution. We are in a hurry, and wo demand immediate results. It will yet be seen that this impatience really stops and does not hasten reform. The granting of pensions is but a branch of Poor Law Reform, and we do not see that the granting of pensions may increase instead of diminish poverty. Mr. Lock has pointed out that notwithstanding all the cry about poverty increasing, poverty is really decreasing. And perhaps there is no one in the United ivingdom so qualified to speak as Mr. Lock, who has made the question of Poor Law Reform a lifelong study. We may give some of the results of Poor Law administration and the progress of the Home Country from a pauper point of view. If the years 1851 and 1891 are compared, the following wui be found, according to the authority wh have named: — 1. There was relative to population about half the number of paupers in 1891 that there was in 1851. 2. There was in 1891 relative to child population, less than half as many dependent children. 3. There was in 1891 relative to the adult papulation : (aged 15 to 60) about two-thirds fewer paupers than in 1851 (that is amongst the able-bodied). 4. There was in 1891 relative to the aged population (over 60) nearly a third fewer aged paupers than in 1851. There was 21.5 per cent, in 1851 and 13.7 per cent, in 1891. The last statement is most important, as it shows that with the progress of the nation and under the present Poor Law administration poverty is being lessened. What will be the effect of this new law of'■giving--pensions? If the pension is given out as poor law relief, will it not $end to lessen the self-respect of the recipients and weaken the impulse, of thrift in the race ? The effect on Friendly Societies also should not be overlooked. Already the Friendly Societies in England have been much distressed by the proposal to have a pension scheme. They state that they would have formulated a scheme that would have been as successful as their great scheme of relief in sickness if this continual talk of Government interference had not affected them. What we fear is that the New Zealand scheme will be extended , and the Friendly Societies, even as to sick pay, injured. If t-is should happen, the effect on the race must prove disastrous. Mr. Lock asks: " Can they not leave the Friendly Socie- " ties to fulfil their mission, to meet new " difficulties and new wants as they have " met the old, and to continue to endow

" the community with those most neces- " sary gifts of deliberation ancl social iore- " sight— gitfts that imply a tone and " temper of mind that Parliament may " quickly undo and destroy, but which " it can never restore or revive ?'

We have entered t on a scheme of which we do not see the end. We have done so because some of us have kept on repeating that poverty is increasing though it is diminishing, and we have not counted tne cost of the new departure.