Nelson Evening Mail FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 1922 NATIONAL PENSIONS

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LVI, 17 November 1922, Page 4

Nelson Evening Mail FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 1922 NATIONAL PENSIONS

BEFORE the .Progressive and Moderate Labour Tarty breathed its last, after a brief life, its leader, Mr C. E. Statbam, did one good service for which the average New Zealander can be grateful, In one of his policy speeches he showed that he had given much helpful, constructive thought to the matter of pensions from the national viewpoint. His opinions were stated thus:—-"A mam who had worked hard was entitled to rest and |o have sufficient in his old age, Tim old ago pensions seheme. though it had given much relief (o deserving people, was on the wrong basis, as it could be claimed only by people practically without means. They wanted to see a man or woman, on reaching 60 years of age, entitled of right to a pension of £IOO a year. At present most suporanrtuation schemes in the country were under the Government, and subsidised by the State. There wore also some under public bodies and private firm's, but the latter were very difficult to arrange.

They (the Progressive and Modern to La-f hour Party) proposed that, all should be united in one big scheme. At. a com servativc estimate the wages bill of the country was £76,000,000. A contribution of 21. per cent, by the Worker,' 2!j per cent, by the employer, and per cent, by the Slate would give an annual return of £5,742,000. They pro- j

posed to accumulate that for six years at. 6 per cent, interest compounded. That would give a capital sum of £40,000,000, which would yield an annual sum of £2,412.000. Added to the annual contributions this would give over £8,000,000. which would be sufficient to pay £IOO to each man and woman over 60 years of age. The State was paying a largo sum annually for old age pensions and for subsidies to various superannuation funds, and that would be saved.” t U is a wdl-known fact that employees of the State and some employees of local bodies enjoy privileges in regard to superannuation. The employees contribute to the schemes, but some of the support comes from the public. Ihclud-

ed in this public arc wage-earners for whom the old ago prospect is very cheerless. This, of course, is not right, but let us remove the injustice not by taking Government support from the supers nnuation funds, but by enabling all to receive a pension. It may be said that there are various .schemes by 'which such workers can make some voluntary provision for their old age, but even when this is admitted there remains the in, deniable truth that this great social problem is in a very unsatisfactory state to-day. Of course, at the present moment, when captain sof industry are complaining about the wages bill, and numbers of workers are resenting the Arbitration Court's reductions of tho cost of living bonuses of recent years, and the Government lias a regime of retrenchment, there would be much opposition to the basis of contributions suggested by Mr Statbnm, but it has to be remembered that New Zealand is progressing steadily through the bad times. Also, it is arguable, even in times like the present, whether an immediate national saving could not bo effected by- a carefully planned national policy in which all existing superannuation schemes and similar enterprises could he merged. The public have to get tho truth firmly into their heads that the national wealth necessary for the maintenance of the aged and infirm must have its expression in food, clothing and other necessaries—and the assuring of such supplies on a great national scale would demand very careful and intelligent management of a National Pensions scheme. Then there is the proper care of families bereft of the breadwinner. By some such scheme, this family must be maintained in reasonable comfort. Compulsory contributions by the individual, supplemented by the State, should provide all that is required. It is a big task, a big need, but there are no insurmountable difficulties. The principal difficulty is a very old one—the difficulty of persuading the representatives of the people to give enough thought, time amt energy to the achievement (f such an ideal.