HL Deb 07 November 1912 vol 12 cc899-910

LORD HENEAGE rose to call attention to the National Insurance Act and the impossibility of workers understanding the unlimited amount of regulations and literature issued by the Insurance Commissioners from time to time to modify or explain the complicated provisions of the Act; and to ask whether it is the intention of the Government to introduce an amending Bill during the present session of Parliament.

The noble Lord said: My Lords, in the summer we had several what the noble and learned viscount on the Woolsack called useful conversations with regard to this Act, and we were told that there were colossal difficulties in the way. I want to know what has been done to meet these great difficulties. First, with regard to medical benefits, your Lordships passed a resolution that it was absolutely necessary that the Government should come to an agreement with the medical profession in order that the Act might be carried out. A similar resolution was also adopted by the House of Commons. Three months elapsed and nothing was done. Now the Chancellor of the Exchequer is reported to have said that he always knew that the terms offered in the Act were insufficient; also that it is absurd to ask labouring men in rural districts to send prescriptions to a chemist, and that the doctor ought to be allowed to dispense his own medicine. I made exactly the same suggestion last July, but I did not receive very much sympathy from the Government Bench with regard to it at that time.

We are also told in the Press that the Chancellor of the Exchequer has now after three months offered new terms. I should like to ask the noble Earl who is going to reply to me what are the exact advantages of the new proposals over those of the Act which have already been refused by the doctors and which the Chancellor of the Exchequer now admits he did not think were quite fair to them. I am quite sure that no settlement will be satisfactory to those who have to contribute under this Act unless they have a free choice of doctors and unless the doctors are allowed to dispense their own medicines in the rural districts. One of the great faults of the Insurance Act is the failure to recognise the entirely different circumstances and requirements of workers in country districts and workers in the towns, and the great distances which the doctors have to travel in country districts to see their patients, necessitating their keeping either horses or motor-cars. Had there been a greater distinction made between what is required by rural contributors and contributors in towns, and a recognition of the conditions of medical service in the country in comparison with that in towns, I think the Act would have worked much more smoothly. There is one thing which I am quite certain, having had some experience lately in forming a rural workers' association in Lincolnshire and Nottinghamshire, will not satisfy the contributors. They will not consider that a staff medical service of doctors set up from among the medical students of Wales or Ireland, or perhaps of England will carry out the contract entered into with them in the Act by the Government. They desire to have the best medical advice at their disposal, and to have the free choice of the medical men whom they desire to employ.

There is another question to which I desire to call the noble Earl's attention, and that is the transfer question. He will recollect that in the summer I called attention to what would be certain to be the result of the misleading pamphlet which was circulated through the Post Office. My prognostications have proved to be absolutely true. An enormous number of labourers in the country districts were raked into the Prudential and other societies through fear that they would be under a penalty if they did not become contributors by July 15. The Insurance Commissioners have had to take cognisance of that, and for the last six weeks these people have been allowed to transfer to societies which were more beneficial to them without the societies of which they had already become members being allowed to prevent them. But the period fixed has already expired or expires in the course of a few days. What I want to know is, What are the conditions under which transfer is to be made in the future? I do not wish to press the noble Earl too far on that point, because I happen to know by accident that the matter is still under the consideration of the Commissioners, and that they have not perfected the circular which they are going to send out. At any rate I hope that these misguided people will be allowed every freedom possible to enable them to transfer to societies which will be more beneficial to them. I have been led to put this Question on the Paper partly by a resolution which was passed by the Lincolnshire and Nottinghamshire Rural Workers' Insurance Society, a copy of which resolution the noble Earl has in his hand. Therefore I will not trouble to read it to the House, as no doubt the noble Earl will, in the course of his remarks, reply to the points therein referred to.

The greatest difficulties have arisen in regard to sub-contractors, estate and casual labourers, and outworkers generally, and these difficulties have been pressed from time to time upon the attention of the Commissioners, not only by the Lincolnshire and Nottinghamshire Rural Workers' Association, but by the friendly and other societies. I should like very much to know what has been done with regard to these different classes. There are also two other classes in connection with which great difficulties have arisen—charwomen and domestic servants. The conditions with regard to these persons all require to be made clear. It is not fair that it should be left to the Insurance Commissioners to decide from day to day who are and who are not legally compelled to be contributors. A great many hard cases have arisen. I know from my own knowledge that a large number of women who have been in the habit of earning a small pittance, and also casual labourers, have been thrown out of employment, in some eases through a misunderstanding of the Act and in other cases through the Act itself. One of the reasons why so much confusion has been caused is that with regard to two different classes the words "exceptions" and "exemptions" have been used. The two words are so similar that people who do not understand the Act—and I admit that I do not understand it myself—confuse those who come under the exemption clauses with those who come under the exception clauses. All that requires to be made clear. It is impossible to keep pace with the number of pamphlets and regulations which are issued to us day after day, and as far as I am concerned I have entirely given it up. I ask that when these questions have been considered—and I should think they ought to have been considered by now—an amending Bill should be brought in and passed through Parliament making absolutely clear what the clauses do mean, and where they require alteration they should be altered in a fair and reasonable manner.

I wish to call attention to the char women's question. It has always been understood that women were not to be compelled to become contributors if what they earned was not their real means of livelihood. That is to say, if a wife or a daughter was adding to the breadwinner's earnings some two or three shillings a week apiece by going out chasing or washing, that should not compel them to come under the Act. But I can assure the noble Earl that in a great number of cases they have been told that they must come under the Act. Take the case of a woman who goes to assist at a public-house on the occasion of a cricket match or a football match. She gets 1s. for the day, and out of that 1s. she has to pay 3d., and her employer has to pay 3d., because she has been employed for the purposes of trade. I am informed that if she had gone to the noble Earl's house or to the house of any other noble Lord at the time of an entertainment she would not have been chargeable, because entertainments are not supposed to be a profitable part of the householder's business. There is even a worse case than that, to my mind, the case of the poor woman who comes in to clean schools for an hour, we will say, every day in the week. She only gets 6d. a day, and the most she could earn in the week is from 2s. 6d. to 3s.; but out of that she has to pay 3d., and another 3d. in respect of her has to come out of the rates; and I am told that in Parts of Lindsey the cost for these school-cleaners will amount to £1,000 in the year on the rates.

I would impress upon the noble Earl and upon those more responsible for the conduct of this Act that it is no good going on issuing these complicated leaflets when the Act must be amended and made clear. The Government have had nearly a year with advisory committees in existence, and they must know what they intend the Act to mean. At any rate, if they do not they ought to say so. The sanatoria arrangements are at the present moment most unsatisfactory, and from all I hear, unless some clear and satisfactory agreement is made with the medical profession before January 12 next there will be a tremendous revolt among all classes against this Act, and it will not be as successful as, now that it is the law, I should wish it to be.

LORD LOVAT

My Lords, before the noble Earl replies I should like to associate myself with everything that has fallen from my noble friend Lord Heneage in regard to the Insurance Act. Probably no Act that has ever been passed by Parliament was drawn up in such a slovenly fashion, or has caused so many difficulties to those who really wish to administer the law in the best possible manner. I can speak as one who has worked on a county council and also on a couple of approved societies, and I can assure your Lordships that the number of leaflets we receive on this subject every day would take one hour if not two hours to read through. Surely the time has arrived when these leaflets might come to an end. I suggest that His Majesty's Government should convene meetings of the advisory councils and consult with them, and finally make up their minds about a great many points concerning which questions are continually being sent up by county councils, insurance bodies, and approved societies, and which questions very often are either not attended to or ambiguous answers are returned which leave those bodies in the same state of doubt as before. The treatment meted out to those who are trying to carry out this slovenly Act and the difficulty in interpreting it really make it almost impossible for those concerned to see that the insured individuals get the best possible return for their contributions.

I should like to say a word on the question of transfer from one society to another. I do not think the majority of insured persons understand the transfer regulations, and I am sure that a great many would wish to transfer from some of those societies into which they were driven on July 15 by misleading statements on the part of His Majesty's Government. I am certain that those who have not paid close attention to the working of this Act are not aware how absolutely important it is for healthy individuals to join societies which deal with healthy individuals. I mean that people employed in the country should join approved societies which are mainly filled with men employed in country occupations. I will quote examples from Scotland. I am sure they are identical with what exists all over Great Britain. In connection with two or three farms in Scotland we got the farmers to make a return showing what would have happened had the Act been in force and their farm hands been employed over a five year period. We asked them to show exactly what the farm hands would have received in respect of maternity benefit, what they would have saved themselves in the matter of doctors' attendance, and what they would have got during the five years in sickness and other benefits, and we found that the very large majority of the men would have received absolutely nothing during that period. In the case of one large estate on which there are 140 employed individuals the return showed that, with the employer's contributions added, something like £800 or £900 would have been paid in during the five year period, but, including maternity benefits, only £60 would have been received. It is obvious that these people are only benefited if they enter societies which comprise employees engaged in other healthy trades. These men were taken in by the statements made in July last and rushed into societies which deal with all individuals, some good lives and some bad. Therefore I wish to insist on the point brought out by Lord Heneage, that the minds of insured people should be disabused of the idea of any difficulty in transferring to more suitable societies. Then men occupied in healthy country pursuits will once again have the opportunity of getting into those societies which deal with healthy employees, so that they may get full advantage out of the Act.

No mention was made by Lord Heneage of the subject of unemployment. It is surely a gross anomaly that men like estate carpenters and men engaged on timber works who are not in the trade and who are paid by the year or by the month should have to pay that contribution. There have been several instances brought to my notice, but as yet, as far as I know, the cases of these men have not been attended to. The Act being passed both sides wish to make it a success, but I can assure the noble Earl that those concerned with its administration are growing tired of the obstacles that are put in their way, the little attention that has been given to their recommendations, and the difficulty of getting answers to questions, mainly on account; no doubt, of the very slovenly way in which the Act was drawn.

EARL BEAUCHAMP

My Lords, I know quite well that when on previous occasions Lord Heneage has brought up for discussion in this House subjects connected with the Insurance Act we have not always been able to agree, but I should be sorry if he thought we did not regard his efforts with sympathy, because we know he has been good enough, in Lincolnshire especially, to take great interest in the working of the Act, as also has Lord Lovat in Scotland. I am glad to have this opportunity of expressing our acknowledgments to Lord Heneage for all the trouble he has taken on behalf especially of the Rural Workers' Society in Lincolnshire. But I think, so far as the number of circulars is concerned, that both noble Lords have probably received a double number, for this raison—they probably received them as members of this House, and also in the case of the noble Lord below the Gangway, as the trustee of a society, and in the case of Lord Lovat probably as a member of an insurance committee. Therefore having received two copies of every document which has been issued by the Insurance Commissioners, they, perhaps, have an exaggerated view of the total number, which really is not so large as they think.

But I freely admit that a large number of circulars have been issued by the Insurance Commissioners, and I think it is quite right that they should have done all they could to explain the provisions of the Act. On a former occasion the noble Marquess opposite did me the honour of quoting from an imperfect report of a speech I made on the subject, in which I laid stress on the complications of the measure. It is quite true the Act is complicated, but any Act which deals with the organisation of society as a whole must necessarily be complicated. In the history of the world society was never so complicated in its organisation as it is to-day. Therefore in so far as it was determined—and rightly determined—that this Act should deal with something more than the main first principles it was bound to be complicated. Although it would have been possible to lay down one or two principles and he content with that, it was quite rightly thought that that was an improper way of conducting legislation of this importance and magnitude, and as an alternative it was thought right that we should deal in some detail with the conditions of the people of to-day. That being so, I quite admit that the Insurance Commissioners have had to issue a number of circulars dealing, with the different classes.

It is not necessary, however, for all the insured people to study all or even a large part of the documents issued. In the ordinary course insured persons will apply to their approved societies for information as to the conduct of business under the Act, and the literature issued on this subject is intended more especially -for the officials of societies. Let me give an example. It is quite unnecessary for soldiers and sailors to study the circulars which are issued with regard to charwomen, nor is it necessary for charwomen to consider the circulars which deal with soldiers and sailors. The Commissioners have issued a subject-index, of which I shall be glad to send a copy to the noble Lord if he has not already received one, and this distinguishes seven circulars and memoranda as being of special importance. The Commissioner would be prepared, if desire was expressed for it, to extend that index into a handbook for society officials. But the general part of the literature dealing with sanatoria and medical benefits is addressed to the members and clerks of insurance committees and not to insured members. It will be for them to disseminate the information to insured persons in their area. In the same way documents explaining provisions of the Act with regard to particular classes of employment are intended, in the first place, for the employers concerned, with whom rests responsibility for seeing that the proper contributions are made. No society or person is required to read the whole of this literature. The total number of documents issued in connection with the insurance of 14,000,000 persons through more than 20,000 societies and branches must necessarily be considerable.

The noble Lord has asked whether it is the intention of His Majesty's Government to deal with this matter by legislation during the present session. It is not the intention of His Majesty's Government to do so, and for this reason. A great many of the matters referred to by the noble Lord—matters, I think, of real difficulty—must, in their Opinion, be settled by administration by the Insurance Commissioners. There is direct power given in the Act itself to the Commissioners to settle a good many of these points, and it is in the opinion of the Government right that they should exercise that power rather than that there should be introduced an amending Bill. We do not at present see the need for an amending Bill.

LORD HENEAGE

The Commissioners cannot go outside the four corners of the Act, can they?

EARL BEAUCHAMP

No.

LORD HENEAGE

Therefore it is only within the Act that they can act.

EARL BEAUCHAMP

I think it is quite easy to compose tremendously difficult puzzles about charwomen and the method of their employment, questions which I do not think any legislation can fairly settle. You must in these complicated and difficult questions settle the principle, and then give the Insurance Commissioners power to decide within the limits laid down in the Act. That is the line on which the Insurance Commissioners are proceeding at the present time. I can assure the noble Lord that if he would be good enough to communicate to us the points on which he thinks that amendment is desirable we should be very glad indeed to consider them, though, so far as we are at present advised, not with a view to any immediate amendment of the Act.

With regard to medical benefits, to which the noble Lord referred, I am sorry to say that I did not expect from the terms of his Question that he would lay so much stress upon them as he has done; but it is, I am sure, matter of common knowledge that fresh terms have been suggested and are now being considered by the medical associations throughout the country. It was only yesterday or the day before that there was an important meeting of the doctors in London, and if, as seems likely, their willingness to work the Act is followed very generally throughout the country, I think we have every reason to hope there will be an efficient medical service at the disposal of the insured people upon the day on which it is promised in the Act itself.

The noble Lord referred to a certain resolution which has been sent by the committee of a society in Lincolnshire. I hope the noble Lord will allow me, in referring to this, to say that from the documents which I have here I understand that a conference, which met on September 12, appointed representatives to a joint meeting which met on September 27, and that they sent to the Commissioners a certain letter. It was despatched, I think, on September 27. It was acknowledged at once, and a further letter in answer to it was sent on October 16 to the secretary from whom the communication had been received. This resolution to which the noble Lord refers dealt, in the first place, with the question of transfer. That matter has already been referred to by the noble Lord on a previous occasion in this House. It was after that discussion that a conference took place between the representatives of a large number of societies and the Insurance Commissioners, and some 700 societies in all agreed for the time being to a system by which transfers should be possible from one society to another without any objection being made or without any discussion of any kind; and that was to last until September 30. A good many of these societies, by mutual arrangement, have agreed to extend the time or did agree to extend it so long as it concerned the first quarter card. That, of course, as the noble Lord knows, has now expired. All transfers after October 26 have to be dealt with under Section 31 of the Act. The noble Lord probably remembers that the Insurance Commissioners were required to issue instructions. Those are in an advanced state, and the Commissioners hope they will be immediately issued, perhaps even to-night, but certainly in a few days. This matter has already been dealt with in another place. No doubt the noble Lord remembers that no society may unreasonably withhold their permission from any individual to transfer from one society to another; and in another place Mr. Masterman said— The Commissioners in the early months of the Act would require very clear proof that the society from which a member was withdrawing would suffer material harm by his withdrawal before they decided not to pay his transfer value to the second society. Therefore it is clear that for the next month or so it will be easy for any individual following the prescribed course to secure his transfer from one society to another. The appeal will lie to the Insurance Commissioners, and it will be for them to say whether in their opinion the consent is being unreasonably withheld. It is clear that the temporary arrangement which was in force during the months of August and September cannot be continued, because it was dependent upon the mutual consent of a number of these societies. The time for which they agreed has now elapsed, and unless they came together and agreed among themselves that there should be a renewal of that arrangement it would not be possible for the Insurance Commissioners to force it upon them.

The noble Lord's reference to the Lincolnshire resolution reminds me that difficulties have arisen with regard to the administration and the interpretation of the Act in reference to sub-contractors, estate workers, casual labourers, charwomen, and outworkers generally, as well as regards domestic servants. We are quite ready to admit that there may be exceedingly difficult questions of interpretation and administration, but we do not yet feel that they are such as to require any amending legislation at the present time. I can assure the noble Lord that the Insurance Commissioners are doing their best to settle all these questions as they arise, and I do not suppose they will find any real difficulty to contend with at the expiration of a month or two from now. If I understood rightly the reference which was made by Lord Lovat to estate workers, he allude rather to unemployment. As the unemployment section of the Act refers more to the Board of Trade than to the National Health Insurance Commissioners it would be more convenient that it should be dealt with on a separate occasion and in a separate way. That question is not intimately connected with the health side, at any rate, of national insurance, and is not administered by the same Commisioners. On the whole, therefore, I do not know that there is anything more I hace to say, except to express the hope that Lord Heneage will continue to take the same interest in the administration of the Act in the future, and to assure him that we shall always be glad to consider any suggestions he may have to make on the subject.

House adjourned at twenty minutes past Six o'clock, till To-morrow, half-past Ten o'clock.