HC Deb 22 July 1912 vol 41 cc808-9
68. Mr. WORTHINGTON-EVANS

asked why the intended permission to employers to perforate insurance stamps before use as in the case of postage stamps in order to prevent pilfering has been abandoned; and, if perforation is not permitted in order to prevent identification of the employer of any workman, whether the power to obtain a new card on change of employment is sufficient protection to the workman?

Mr. MASTERMAN

It has throughout been the object of the Government to avoid creating a system under which the contribution card could be used as a record of the employment of the contributor. The power given to the contributor to obtain a new card on changing his employment was only intended for use in very exceptional cases where some such measure might be desirable in the interests of the contributor, and its general exercise would lead to a good deal of confusion and inconvenience. If however, the hon. Member can suggest any means by which employers can identify their stamps which is not open to the objection stated above, I should be happy to consider it in consultation with my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade, who is also concerned in the matter.

Mr. WORTHINGTON-EVANS

Has it not been stated that permission would be given for the usual perforation of stamps?

Mr. MASTERMAN

No, I do not think so. I think it was stated that at present permission could not be given owing to the fact that an employed contributor should not have reported on his card who his last employer was.

Mr. WORTHINGTON-EVANS

Has he not power to get a new card?

Mr. MASTERMAN

I have stated already we only designed that for use in exceptional cases.

Mr. WORTHINGTON-EVANS

Is it not also possible that that might apply to the case of perforated stamps?

Mr. MASTERMAN

It might be applicable to that, but we do not suppose it will be a universal practice for men who leave one employment to go to another to ask for a new card.