CLAUSE 9.—(Rates of contributions.) (Hansard, 21 July 1920)

Mr. T. THOMSON
I beg to move, in page 8, line 41, after the word "where," to insert the words "on the application of the employer."
There is a fear felt in certain quarters that the employés of local authorities, who have superannuation schemes, may be automatically excluded, whether they desire it or not. The insertion of the words now proposed would guard them against automatic exclusion, so that it would require an application on behalf of the local authority to the Minister before they were excluded. If their fear is not already covered by the Bill, I hope that the Minister will see his way to accept these words.

§ Mr. SPENCER
I beg to second the Amendment.

§ Sir K. WOOD
The Committee will observe that the Amendment affects paragraph (c) of Sub-section (1) of Clause 8, which provides 2074 Where the Minister is satisfied as respects any such excepted employment as is mentioned in paragraph (iv) of this Subsection that provision is made as aforesaid for securing benefits in respect of men employed therein on the whole not lees favourable than the benefits by way of old age pensions conferred by this Act on men and their wives, or benefits in respect of women employed therein on the whole not less favourable than the benefits by way of old age pensions conferred by this Act on women, the contributions payable in respect of such men or such women as the case may be, shall be at the rates specified in Part IV of the First Schedule to this Act. That, as the Committee will remember, goes to reduce the contributions. Now my hon. Friend wants to suggest that this should be done on the application of the employer, and that it should be at his instance and at his instance alone. I must point out that if, in fact, these schemes are in operation which are not less favourable they cannot be limited merely to the application of the employer. Therefore, I hope that my hon. Friend will not press me in this connection. The Clause is perfectly fair as it is at present, and I do not think that the Amendment would be helpful.

Mr. THOMSON
I see the point raised by the hon. Member, and I would ask him whether these employés can be excluded except at their own request. Are they protected so that the Minister himself cannot exclude them whether they desire to be excluded or not?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN
As I understand the question of the hon. Member, it relates to employés, but the Amendment, if I understand it aright, relates to employers.

§ Sir K. WOOD
I beg to move in page 9, line 16, after the word "any" to insert the word "railway."
This is a purely drafting Amendment. It is suggested that if the word were not included it might raise some difficulties, and it is now inserted with the object of bringing railways into this class of employés.