THE NATIONAL INSURANCE ACT.
[TO THE EDITOR OF THE "SrEcrxraz."]
SIR,—I see that in your notes of the week ending May 3rd you again refer to the position of the deposit contributors under the National Insurance Act as a poor one, a position " which stultifies the whole theory of the Act." I shall be -very grateful if you or your readers will indicate what amend- ment you would suggest in order to benefit the position of these poor people—poor in health, poor in means, and, until the Insurance Act came into force, not only poor in opportunity but absolutely beggared of it. How do you or your friends propose, without a dole from the State—which might rob the doctors of theirs—or a curtailment of the benefits of the -ordinary contributor, to place these pitiable deposit contri- butors in a better position ? The Government, I take it, .anticipate being better prepared to answer this question after two more years' proof of the Act, for the deposit section only bolds good for three years. There are, however, evidently plenty of people outside the Government who do not require this experience to teach them, but are ready prepared to show us the way. Will you or your correspondents give us a lead ?
[We cannot promise to publish an indefinite number of sePlies to this question, but will do our best as far as space allows.—En. Spectator.]
Previous page
