MUTUAL AID

Otago Daily Times, Issue 26750, 20 April 1948, Page 4

MUTUAL AID

VOLUNTARY AGENCIES RECORD OF SERVICE The important part played in Great Britain by a great variety of what he described as mutual-aid and philanthropic agencies and their relation to the social security scheme formed the basis of an address given at the University of Otago last night by Lord Beveridge. He stressed that notwithstanding all that the Government was doing and was proposing to do in eliminating the worst effects of unemployment, and the provision of sickness and other benefits, there was still an important part for voluntary agencies to play, and any interference with them was to be deprecated. There was a large attendance ,and Lady Beveridge accompanied her husband on the platform. Dr G. C. Billing, professor of economics at the University of Otago who presided, described the speaker as the “ greatest humanitarian of the century.” Lord Beveridge explained that he had finished writing a book before he left England on the part played by voluntary organisations in social security such as friendly societies, trades unions, and hosts of other bodies. He had received the assistance of a committee in this work, a member of which had been Lady Beveridge, and he hoped to have it published in July. Friendly. Societies

Giving a resume of the book Lord Beveridge stressed the important part mat had been played in providing a measure of security for their members by friendly societies. The National Deposit Friendly Society which was the largest body of its kind in Britain, although most people in the Dominion may., never have heard of it, had a membership of 1,700,000. When Britain's social security scheme was functioning some of these societies would find themselves in a difficult position and some of the old ones might lose up to half of their business. One of the largest bodies had approached him on the question of writing a report on the subject of the effect of social security on the friendly society movement and he thought every credit was due to the society concerned for having taken such a broad view of its responsibilities. It was significant, perhaps, Lord Beveridge continued, that the friendly society movement should have arisen in Scotland, the first having been the Association of the Cotters of Leith which was founded in 1555, and was still in existence, with a membership of 50 and accumulated funds amounting to £II,OOO. The movement had become more English than Scottish, however, and to-day there were 8,000,000 members in Great Britain, against 80,000 in the Dominion, but if New Zealand had the same proportion as far as population was concerned the total would be 300,000. There was a great variety of “ affiliated ordars,” like the Ancient Order of Foresters, Druids, and other bodies. These all consisted of small branches, and therefore all the members knew one another, but they were linked together by districts and by a unity, and if a branch got into difficulties ,it would have the backing of the districts. It was an interesting example of federal government. “ The British,” he said, “ have been responsible for many inventions in the realms of politics, and these ‘ affiliated orders ’ are as much a British invention as representative government.”

Sturdy Individualism Lord Beveridge explained that in Great Britain trade unions had an important friendly society side, spending about as much on benefits as the friendly societies themselves. The unions had immense political and economic power, and spent over £6,000,000 a year on organisation alone, and they had really become the Fourth Estate. One of the features of unionism in Britain was the extreme independence showp by . the unions themselves. It was an example of “resolute individualism.” The speaker added that he thought this was a very good thing. Lord Beveridge went on to emphasise the part played by the co-operative movement, with its 9,500,000 members, and other organisations such as building and housing societies. There was stul a lot of work to be done by various philanthropic bodies, but this did not mean the giving of coal and blankets to the poor. Their sphere of activity lay in such directions as making provision for those who were physically or socially handicapped. There were also the Women's Voluntary Services Bureau, which was giving advice and help on all questions of family life. In answer to a question why he had not advocated the payment of the family allowance for the first child, Lord Beveridge explained that a head of a family who was fully employed would be in a position to support the first child without any Government assistance. The British Government had adopted this principle, but, unfortunately, it had cut down the allowance payable from 8s to ss. Lord Beveridge, replying to another questioner, said he was of the opinion that social security would not destroy friendly societies, but he thought the older ones would have a difficult time. The speaker was accorded a vote of thanks.