SECURITY' THAT IS

Evening Post, Volume CXXVI, Issue 74, 24 September 1938, Page 8

SECURITY' THAT IS

SECURE

Labour's endeavour to use social security as" a trump election card was made quite apparent by the Prime Minister when he spoke in Wellington. By his readiness to j take up what he called the challenge of the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Savage conveyed the impression that if the people failed to return Labour to office they could say good-bye to social security principles. The National Party manifesto certainly states that the party, on becoming the Government, will not operate the Act passed this year, but the manifesto also makes it abundantly clear that the proposals contained in the Act will be replaced by a scheme which promises essential benefits based on principles of equity and financed in such a way that the security which it is aimed to provide will not challenge the security of the country as a whole. This point was well made the other evening by the National candidate for Wellington Central (Mr. Appleton). "We will introduce a scheme which will be more beneficial in its results and more equitable in its incidence," he said. "It will provide real superannuation and there will be no means test." Although we have consistently criticised the Government's scheme, we have never opposed the principle of social security. The Social Security Act is unsound on two main grounds. In the first place it is inequitable in its operation, and in the second place its financial structure' is unsound. In its anxiety to place the legislation on the Statute Book, the Government has failed to perform a plain duty—to show that the country can afford to carry the scheme. It has gambled recklessly on the future and has raised hopes which it cannot be certain of justifying. Once the plunge is taken the country will be in danger of being saddled with a load which it will find impossible to carry. That danger is seen by the National Party and it suggests an alternative scheme which might not be so spectacular as that of the Government, but is infinitely safer. Wliile recognising the need for many, of the benefits provided in the Social Security Act, the National Party also sees the need to tread warily. In that view it should have the support of all those who have the true welfare of New Zealand at heart and are concerned with the country's financial 'stability. A steady advance (as proposed by the National Party) may be too slow for Labour that rushes in,, but when the ground is unknown a dashing career is likely to end in a painful stumble.