“Pensioners Need $2 More A Week”

Press, Volume CVIII, Issue 31841, 20 November 1968, Page 32

“Pensioners Need $2 More A Week”

(Nett Zealand Press Association) WELLINGTON, November 19. A rise of at least $2 a week was required to increase the pensioner's standard of living to what should be the absolute minimum, Sir Basil Arthur (Lab., Timaru » said during the resumed second reading debate on the Social Security Amendment Bill, in Parliament today.

Sir Basil Arthur said a Royal Commission to investigate the position of pensioners throughout the country would be set up by a Labour Government. and would have been set up already if the position of the parties in the House were reversed.

“These people are in dire need and their position has deteriorated over the last six years under a National Government.” he said. Mr V S. Young (Nat.. Egmont) said there had been only one increase in the basic social security benefit during the term of the last Labour Government. He said the National Party believed it should approach the problem with a degree of flexibility. It needed to recognise, he said, that some people’s needs were greater than others. Mr H. E. L. Pickering (Nat.. Rangiora) claimed that the main reason for increased costs was rising wages and the only solution to this was for a more stable wage structure. He criticised the Labour Party for claiming that social security benefits were not sufficient when at the same time they supported measures to increase wages, which must inevitably lead to higher living costs. Mr R. L. Bailey (Lab..

Heretaunga): "Are Government members not aware that the benefit is inadequate and that many people on the benefit are living below an acceptable standard?” Mr Bailey challenged members of the Government to bring forward a budget by ,’ which they could live on the , basic social security benefit. , M H. J. Walker (Nat., St i Albans) said that earlier in the debate the Leader of the Social Credit League and member for Hobson (Mr V. F. ' Cracknell) had proposed more "generous benefits. 1 While the Government would like to support him. ' it could only give what the country could afford. The amending hill introduced some of the most advanced social legislation seen in the House for some considerable time. Mr Walker said. “What is being introduced here will not be overlooked by those who will benefit from it,” he said. Mr N J. King (Lab., Waite-) mata) said any increases the Government had made to benefits during its term was forced upon it by increased costs.

! As it was. other countries (spent a bigger percentage of; their national production on benefits. The Netherlands spent 13 per cent. Belgium 12.5. Britain 10.5—compared with New Zealand’s 6.8 per cent. The Minister of Finance (M. Muldoon) said that by announcing it would increase benefits by $2 the Labour) Party had announced it was I (back in the market for votes. I labour’s promises this year now totalled 844.5m—523m ‘for the S2 a week for a year.) and the rest in increased medical benefits. Illusory Gifts "The money is not there—it cannot be found. “If the people of New Zea-1 : land elected a Labour Gov-[ eminent they would find it) [was a barmecide (giver of; [illusory gifts)," said Mr Mui-) doon. The Leader of the Opposition (Mr Kirk) told the House) he proposed to move that the, second reading of the bill be deferred for a fortnight and be referred to the Social Services Committee. During this time the committee would carry out a. national survey of beneficiaries’ living costs, create) a special cost-of-living index, and set up provisions by), which an automatic six- ) monthly review of benefits) could be carried out. Speaker’s Ruling

' The Speaker later ruled that [this could not be done during! Itlie second reading of a bill. Mr Kirk challenged any member of the House to live! on the benefit it was giving single beneficiaries. “There are a substantial number of people in New Zealand who can only be described as underprivileged because of the inadequate benefits they are receiving,”! Mr Kirk said.