§ Wherever I went in Germany, north or south, and whomever I met, whether it was an employer or a workman, a Conservative or a Liberal, a Socialist or a Trade Union Leader—men of all ranks, sections and creeds of one accord joined in lauding the benefits which have been conferred upon Germany by this beneficent policy. Several wanted extensions, but there was not one who wanted to go back. The employers admitted that at first they did not quite like the new burdens it cast upon them, but they now fully realised the advantages which even they derived from the expenditure, for it had raised the standard of the workman throughout Germany. By removing that element of anxiety and worry from their lives it had improved their efficiency. Benefits which in the aggregate amounted to 40 millions a year were being distributed under this plan. When I was there the Government were contemplating an enlargement of its operation which would extend its benefits to clerks and to the widows and orphans of the industrial population. They anticipated that when complete the total cost of the scheme would e 53 millions a year. Out of the 40 millions the Government contributes something under three millions a year. Out of the 53 millions they were looking forward to having to find five millions. I know it is always suggested that any approval of the German scheme necessarily involves a condemnation of the Act of last year. That is not so. The Act of last year constitutes the necessary basis upon which to found any scheme based on German lines. It would be quite impossible to work any measure which would involve a contribution from men who are either already 70 years of age or approaching the confines of that age as a condition precedent to their receiving any benefits. It was therefore essential that people who had attained this great age should be placed in a totally different category. But that is not a reason why the young and vigorous who are in full employment should not be called upon to contribute towards some proposals for making provision for those accidents to which we are all liable, and always liable.
§ At the present moment there is a network of powerful organisations in this 486 country, most of them managed with infinite skill and capacity, which have succeeded in inducing millions of workmen in this country to make something like systematic provision for the troubles of life. But in spite of all the ability which has been expended upon them, in spite of the confidence they generally and deservedly inspire, unfortunately there is a margin of people in this country amounting in the aggregate to several millions who either cannot be persuaded or perhaps cannot afford to bear the expense of the systematic contributions which alone make membership effective in these great institutions. And the experience of this and of every other country is that no plan or variety of plans short of an universal compulsory system can ever hope to succeed in adequately coping with the problem. In this country we have trusted until recently to voluntary effort, but we found that for old age and accidents it was insufficient. In Belgium they have resorted to the plan of granting heavy subsidies to voluntary organisations, and they have met with a certain amount of success. But whether here or in Belgium, or in any other land, success must be partial where reliance is absolutely placed upon the readiness of men and women to look ahead in the days of abounding health and strength and buoyancy of spirit to misfortunes which are, not even in sight, and which may be ever averted.
§ The Government are now giving careful consideration to the best methods for making such a provision. We are investigating closely the plans adopted by foreign countries, and I hope to circulate Papers on the point very soon. We have put ourselves into communication with the leaders of some of the principal friendly societies in the country with a view to seeking their invaluable counsel and direction. We could not possibly get safer or more experienced advisers. We are giving special attention to the important reports of the Poor Law Commission, both Majority and Minority, which advise that the leading principle of poor law legislation in future should be the drawing of a clear and definite line between those whose poverty is the result of their own misdeeds and those who have been brought to want through misfortune. All I am in a position now to say is that, at any rate, in any scheme which we may finally adopt we shall be guided by these leading principles or considerations. The first is that no plan can hope to be really comprehensive or conclusive which does 487 not include an element of compulsion. The second is that for financial as well as for other reasons, which I do not wish to enter into now, success is unattainable in the near future, except on the basis of a direct contribution from the classes more immediately concerned. The third is that there must be a State contribution substantial enough to enable those whose means are too limited and precarious to sustain adequate premiums to overcome that difficulty without throwing undue risks on other contributors. The fourth, and by no means the least important, is that in this country, where benefit and provident societies represent such a triumph of organisation of patience and self-government, as probably no other country has ever witnessed, no scheme would be profitable, no scheme would be tolerable, which would do the least damage to those highly beneficent organisations. On the contrary, it must be the aim of every well-considered plan to encourage, and, if practicable, as I believe it is, to work through them. That is all I propose to say on that particular subject at this juncture. I have gone into it at this length merely to indicate that here also is a source of contingent liability which I am bound to take into account in my financial scheme. In this country we have already provided for the aged over 70. We have made pretty complete provision for accidents. All we have now left to do in order to put ourselves on a level with Germany—I hope our competition with Germany will not be in armaments alone—is to make some further provision for the sick, for the invalided, for widows and orphans. In a well-thought out scheme, involving contributions from the classes directly concerned, the proportion borne by the State need not, in my judgment, be a very heavy one, and is well within the compass of our financial capacity without undue strain upon the resources of the country.