DISTINCT SCHEME

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LXV, Issue 19622, 3 May 1938, Page 5

DISTINCT SCHEME

FARMERS’ VIEW SUPERANNUATION PLANS FINANCE SUGGESTIONS CONTRIBUTION OF 2/- WEEK 3D. IN £ ON INCOME i: 1 - . (Per Press Association.) . WELLINGTON, this day. “A number of the benefits suggested in the Prime Minister’s memorandum seem to be unnecessary or excessive, or unrelated to a superannuation scheme,’'’ • stated the president of the New Zealand Farmers’ Union, Mr. W. W. Mulholland, during the course of a lengthy statement presented to-day before the Parliamentary committee dealing with thb national superannuation and health scheme.

-“Soldiers’- pensions should be dealt with ‘ separately. They are an. obligation which the nation owes to these men, and special and sympathetic consideration should ,be given to those who are prematurely aged througn war service, though' possibly under the ordinary conditions of award they would have difficulty in proving their eligibility.

“Industrial pensions should be a liability on the particular industry concerned,; with, if thought necessary in special instances, some assistance from public funds. Sickness and disability benefits cannot be supported until the proposals are more exactly detailed.

“Sustenance for the relief of unemployment should not be included in a superannuation scheme, or be regarded as a part of a pension scheme. If it is desired to institute a form of unemployment insurance, it should be done specifically under a scheme for that purpose. Under the proposal my union fears that the inducement to seek work will be removed entirely from those who are only capable of earning the lower scales of wages, i Farm Pay Compared “Apparently it is intended that a man with a wife and four children should receive £2/15/- per week. The wages of a farm labourer under the Agricultural Labourers’ Act is £3/2/6, It is fairly obvious that there is no inducement for a man to leave idleness and engage in full-time work for 7/6 per week.

.“Actually, in money he would be better off on sustenance, as he has all his. time to himself and could easily provide more than the value of 7/6 oer week towards his and his family's keep.

“There has not been time to make a proper investigation, but figures which have been made available suggest that a pension of 30/- a week available universally to all persons over the age of 63 years could be financed on the basis of a personal contribution (in lieu of the £1 registration fee) of 2/a week, and a levy of 3d. in the £ on all personal income. In support of this contention we would quote the terms of the National Provident Fund which provides a pension of 30/- a week at the age of 60 for a weeklycontribution of 3/- from the age of 20 —the age at which contributions to the national superannuation scheme are presumed to start. In addition to that, the national provident fund provides for this premium of 3/- per week the following additional benefits:—(a) Children of a deceased or incapacitated contributor (under 14), 7/6 per week- (b) widow of deceased contributor while a child is under 14, 7s 6d per week.

Operation of Fund

“We recommend that the present pension system -should continue in force until it can be gradually eliminated by the operation of the superannuation fund, and that those who are now of an age which will not allow of their contributions being sufficient to enable those benefits to be paid when they reach the age at which they will be entitled to receive them should receive a sufficient old-age pension if entitled to the same. The amount paid from the fund should be such as is actuarially determined on the basis of the length of their contributions.

“There should be no income or other limit to those entitled to bene- ' fits from the superannuation fund—they having paid for them are unconditionally entitled to receive them. The funds and the management should be kept entirely separate from those of the health scheme, and they should be vested in a board set up to manage the scheme. This board and the funds it administers should be kept entirely free from political control. Short Time Allowed “In view of the short time allowed for the consideration of the proposals, we have been unable to give them the careful scrutiny which is essential and we suggest that when the bill' is brought down that it should contain full details of the proposals, and that after it is printed at least three months should be allowed for it to be discussed, and that during this time it should be examined by actuaries and other experts and that their opihions and recommendations be made public.

"7/e would emphasise that in our opinion to proceed with the scheme along the lines of the present proposals is imprudent financially. The prospect of a possible £15,000,000 increase in general taxation at some future time is a possibility which cannot be viewed other than with the giavest misgivings.”

Further Details of Mr. Mulholland’s statement appear on page 13.