64. Miss Rathboneasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what would be the effect on the new Social Insurance Scheme if the age for retirement pensions, at the same rate as at present, were reduced for single women to 58 or 55 years of age, assuming that the cost was met by increased contributions paid by, or on behalf of, all women, married or single, distributed in the same proportion between the women, their employers and the Exchequer as in other parts of the scheme; what would be the increased weekly contributions required from women; and what would be the increased contributions from single women, if levied on contributions paid by, or on their behalf, similarly distributed.
§ Sir W. JowittI have been asked to reply. The cost of reducing the pension 1795 age under the new social insurance scheme, for single women only, from 60 to either 58 or 55, for a pension of £1 a week, would, if taken in isolation, require an extra contribution of about 2d. or 5d., respectively, if paid by or in respect of all women until marriage. The necessary contribution would be only slightly reduced if the liability were extended to all women contributors, married and unmarried. As the hon. Member will appreciate, however, if she reads paragraph 11 of the Government Actuary's memorandum, which deals with the basis of the contributions for women under the scheme, a change in the pension age for single women would necessitate a general reconsideration of the rates of contribution proposed for all classes, both men and women—a task which I should not feel justified in asking the Government Actuary to undertake at the present time.