Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

HEALTH AND SECURITY

—♦ | THE GOVERNMENT’S i j # PLAN ATTACK BY MR S. G. HOLLAND | “DOCTORS CANNOT REMAIN j CONTENTED” I A challenge to the Government to 1 deny that it had received a disquietI ing report on the social security scneme i from the Treasury Department was I issued by Mr S. G. Holland, National [ Party candidate for Christchurch North, at an address at St. James Theatre last evening. M,r Holland, who roundly criticised the scheme, said that the report dealt with the • financial capacity of the country to meet the commitments involved, and instead ot being submitted to the committee investigating the scheme for the information of members and the public, had been pigeon-holed in the Department of Finance. Mr Holland was listened ; to with the greatest attention. , ; While asserting the view of the ! National Party that the first charge ■ on the State was the care of the aged, j the sick, and the poor, Mr Holland | raised the following points against the social security scheme of the Government:— No satisfactory explanation from the Government of the financial side of the scheme. The Opposition requests for evidence during the investigation of the scheme were refused. I The scheme was opposed by the Director-General of Health. Dr. M. H. Watt. Extra taxation to meet the scheme would be necessary. The medical profession could not remain happy under the Government’s scheme. The scheme would result in a poorer service. The existence of the specialist was threatened. There was great anxiety for the fate of the private services. The existence of friendly societies was threatened. “At the very outset I want to repeat what I’ve said so many limes before—the National Party stands for the maintenance of the social services of the country, at a standard .fully adequate for the requirements of the people,” Mr Holland said. “Moreover, we will expand and widen the sdope of those services as found necessary and as can be afforded by the country. We have provided for that in our . policy.” No Pensions Cuts' There were some derisive cries when Mr Holland said that the .days of pensions cuts were over. It was fundamentally unsound to base pensions on record income, however. What people had to be careful of was not to be carried off their feet with nice-sounding phrases and promises of something for nothing, with nothing to back it up. Dealing with the financial aspects of the scheme, Mr Holland declared that the Labour Party was “not a •happy family.” He admired their loyalty to the scheme, but said that there had been a definite cleavage—the left wing versus the rest. The left wing wanted costless pensions—pensions from printed purchasing power. The orthodox ones said—if you can print j pensions, why stop at 30s? ! Referring to the work of the Select t Committee which investigated the I scheme, Mr Holland said that it had | been obvious that the Opposition had no say. The witnesses of the Government were called, and the requests of the Opposition representatives refused. “We had reason to believe that the Treasury (a very important department of Staffe) had submitted an important report. I challenge the Government to deny this. The report was of a most disquieting nature, dealing with the country’s financial capacity to meet the burden involved. We have reason to believe that the report is in the pigeon-holes of the Department of Finance. We asked the responsible officer to be called, and we had a right to ask; but the moment we asked for the report, which might have been a great embarrassment to the Government, we were blocked.” Mr Holland showed the audience the following table of social service expenditure:—

Year ending Amount. £ 1935 .. .. 7.144,000 1936 .. .. 7,756,000 1937 .. .. 9,912,000 1938 .. .. 11,872.000 1939 .. .. 12,774,000 1940 .. .. 24,000,000

Mr Holland explained that the final figure included £1,500,000 for unemployment. Superannuation was extra.

“Applied Lunacy”

“Mr Savage says Iris scheme is applied Christianity. I say, on the present basis, it is applied lunacy, if we embark on a scheme like this without the fullest inquiry. There is this fundamental difference in the policy of the Labour Party and the National Party. They say—spend your money —and live on a pension. They say—a good spender is better than a good saver. Mr Savage says that private savings must cease. We disagree. We say that thrift is an attribute, that it has built up our population into a free, independent, and industrious people. Our pioneers taught and practised thrift and to-day thrift is sneered at and penalised in every direction. Thrift should be encouraged, to reduce the need for pensions to the minimum.”

There was no provision for raising the money and even more taxation would be certain. When Mr Holland criticised the fact that the superannuation would not be fully payable until 1967-68, he was applauded. In 1940-41 the beneficiary would get 3s lOd a week; in 1941-42, 4s 9Jd a week; each year the amount increased by a week. He quoted the following table of the superannuation benefit incidence:— *

“Before we adopt a superannuation scheme the public has a right to know what it will cost in various years,” Mr Holland said. “We have a right to know how the scheme is to be financed, what additional taxes are involved and what groups of people are added to the list of taxpayers.” He also quoted morbidity tables to show the number of persons capable of receiving the benefits. In 1936, he said, the average age of death was 57i years; 6807 people died before reaching 65; 6249 people died after the age of 65. Examining the figures of the Minister in estimating the cost of social security, he said that Mr G. H. Maddex. the British actuary, had estimated a figure of £17,850,000. Additional benefits added were £550,000, making a total of £18,400,000. Deducting soldiers' pensions, amounting to £1,790,000, a total was left of £16,610,000; A sum was deducted of an amount not expected to come to charge, leaving a final total of £15,000,000. Explaining where the money would crane from, Mr Nash had said that, existing taxation, lew the

Age Year Present Pays in when he when he age. for. gets 30s. gets 30s 20 . 45 65 1983 30 . 35 65 1973 40 . 25 69 - 1968 50 .. 15 79 1968 60 . 5 89 1968 65 , — 94 1968 70 . — 99 1968

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19380929.2.46

Bibliographic details

Press, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22519, 29 September 1938, Page 10

Word Count
1,060

HEALTH AND SECURITY Press, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22519, 29 September 1938, Page 10

HEALTH AND SECURITY Press, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22519, 29 September 1938, Page 10

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert