§ Mr. LESLIE SCOTTasked whether, in view of the fact that even with all the assistance available for the framing of a Government Bill two years at least were occupied in the preparation of the National Insurance Bill, he will postpone the Second Reading for a sufficient time to give Members of this House a reasonable opportunity of investigating and considering the effect of its provisions before they have to be discussed?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEI am of opinion that the amount of discussion the II wise should devote to a Bill must necessarily be diminished if special care has been expended in preparing it, and I believe it to be in the public interest that the Second Reading should be proceeded with on the dates which have been announced to the House, so that the House may proceed to examine the details of the measure without exhausting its energies by unduly prolonging the Session.
Mr. PEELMay I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he is aware that the actuarial statements as regards the first portion of the Bill have not been issued to the House of Commons?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEThe Prime Minister promised that they would be circulated to-day.
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEThey will be here to-day. I have been making inquiries, and I find that the proof has been corrected and it has been passed in its final form. I hope it will he circulated in the course of the evening.
§ Mr. ARTHUR LEEMay we assume it as settled that hon. Members will have an opportunity of discussing the matter in the Whole House?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEThat is a question which I would rather the hon. Member addressed to the Prime Minister.
§ Mr. NEWMANasked whether the right hon. Gentleman has received in conference any deputation representing those in employment of collecting societies; whether such deputation has proffered a request that the National Insurance Bill, as introduced, should be referred to a Select Committee, or that the Second Reading of the Bill should be postponed until all interests involved have been given time to place their views before the House?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEI have not received any such deputation since the Bill was introduced.
§ Mr. NEWMANMay I ask if the right hon. Gentleman will receive a deputation on this subject?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEI believe they have applied, and certainly I am prepared to receive deputations from them or any one else equally interested.
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEThe question put to me was whether I had received a deputation. I have not, but I believe I am going to receive a deputation later on.
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEThat I could not tell.
§ Mr. CHIOZZA MONEYIf he receives this deputation I hope he will bear in mind that these collecting societies and companies waste from 6d. to 9d. in the ls. of the money they receive from the poor.
§ Mr. BOOTHasked if a friendly society can become an approved society under the National Insurance Bill if it keeps for specific purposes its reserves and funeral funds, but distributes annually in cash the money saved and subscribed for that object?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEI will refer my hon. Friend to my reply to him last Wednesday.
§ Mr. BOOTHasked if the right hon. Gentleman had received a deputation from the medical profession asking for better treatment under the National Insurance Bill; and whether he contemplates acceding to their request for payment according to the number of visits paid; and, if so, what additional safeguards he proposes to introduce to prevent the dangers of malingering?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEI have received deputations of members of the medical profession on this subject both before and since the provisions of the Bill were made public. I propose making a statement. on the position of doctors under the scheme during the discussion on the Second Reading of the Bill.
§ Sir H. CRAIKMay I ask the right hon. Gentleman if he is aware that a meeting of the Medical Association has been fixed for 31st May, and would it not be possible to wait till then before we vote upon the Second Reading?
§ Mr. MITCHELL-THOMSONIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Royal College of Surgeons at Edinburgh have passed a resolution asking whether the consideration of the measure cannot be further postponed.
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEWith regard to those two questions I think it will be a great advantage to those gentlemen when they meet on 31st May that there should have been a further discussion in this House on those points. I am sure that they are under a complete misapprehension as to the position of doctors under the scheme. I think they will discover that their position will be enormously improved, and therefore I think it will be a great advantage to them that there should be another discussion in the House before they meet.
§ Mr. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINDoes the right lion. Gentleman bear in mind that it is not only the doctors, but all the friendly societies, who are interested, and it is impossible for them to have their meetings before the date fixed for the Second Reading discussion, or for us to be informed of the decisions and opinions expressed at those meetings if the Government adhere to the present date. In order that the House may discuss the matter with full knowledge and come to a sounder decision, will the right hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of taking the Second Reading on a later day?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEI am sure the House will be very reluctant to fix any date that would imperil the passage of the Bill, or that would unduly prolong the length of the Session. Really, I think if the right hon. Gentleman has followed the subject as closely as I am bound to do he will have discovered that all the criticisms directed against the scheme are criticisms of detail, and invariably hon. Members have prefaced their remarks by saying that they are in favour of the object and principle of the Bill. That is all the Second Reading affirms. It does not go beyond that, and I think it would be of enormous advantage to all those friendly societies, insurance societies, and doctors for us to have a full discussion extending over two days in the House of Commons in order to enlighten them upon points which they are really not clear about. It would be an advantage that we should have that discussion before rather than after the meetings referred to.