MIGRATION

Southland Times, Issue 19822, 19 March 1926, Page 7

MIGRATION

COMMITTEE’S REPORT EFFECT OF SOCIAL INSURANCE NEED FOR A BOLDER SCHEME. (Per United Press Association, j London, Mar. 17. Mr Amery presented in Parliament the report of the inter-Departmental Committee appointed to consider the effect of schemes of social insurance in migration. The committee says: We have fully discussed possible methods of counteracting the adverse effect of unemployment insurance and poor law relief which have appreciably discouraged migration at the precise age, when other things being equal, opportunities of life overseas should prove very attractive. We believe when openings in the dominions are made more attractive, as they should be, with improving trade, that if bolder and more comprehensive schemes for development and settlement are undertaken and restrictions on assisted migration, especially on families and women, are modified, social insurance will have comparatively little effect in the way of discouraging migration. The committee’s main recommendations are, first, that the question of reciprocal arrangements of Empire social insurance be discussed at the Imperial Conference, especially uniformity of period of residence as a qualification for the old-age pension; secondly, that the attention of the Unemployment Insurance Committee should be directed to the diminution in the interest in migration on the part of persons aged about 18 when they become eligible for benefits; thirdly, that publicity be given to any dominions’ schemes of social insurance and to the existing facilities for the transfer of migrants’ insurance; fourthly, an extension of the facilities for training juveniles in the elements of rural occupations; fifthly, that all contributory system pensioners going overseas as migrants should be credited with a lump sum equivalent to a year’s pension in lieu of the pension they surrender on migration. The committee states that the steady rise in the standard of living in the United Kingdom has increased the reluctance to migrate and also the restrictions on family migration were so serious that it was doubtful whether adequate redistribution of population would be possible till the faciltiies for families and married people improved. “This, in conjunction with Britain’s shortage of young farm workers and domestics, chiefly explains the lack of increase in migration,” states the report. Dealing with the objection that dominion physical standards are too high, the committee emphasises that the strenuousness of the life overseas requires some degree of fitness, but expresses the opinion that the height limit might reasonably be reconsidered. The report emphasises the harmful effect of stories of unemployment received from overseas, where it was actually confined to the towns and casual workers. It declares that residence in any part of the Empire should be accepted as a qualification for an old-age pension and adds: “We believe Labours fears that a substantial increase in migration would lower wages in the dominions are groundless. Indeed, it has been doubted whether the dominions can maintain the present standard without a substantial development in industries and agriculture, and for thia the first requisite is more people.” It also states that the high cost of ocean passages restricts a number of unassisted immigrants who were inclined to migrate.— A. dr N.Z.