I beg to move:
To add a new sub-section as follows:—
Paragraph (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Act of 1919 is hereby repealed and the following provision shall have effect in lieu thereof:—
In calculating the income mentioned in paragraph (b) of sub-section (1) of Section (2) of the Act of 1911, no account shall be taken of any amounts received by a person, or by the husband or wife of a person, as the case may be, as sickness benefit or disablement benefit under a medical certificate or superannuation benefit, from a friendly society or trade union or under the National Insurance Act, 1911.
The object of this amendment is to repeat practically all the provisions of the 1911 Act, which the original Section proposes to cut out. It is an attempt to prevent those who have been thrifty in their youth and middle age from being penalised in that matter when they come to a certain age. The Government have embarked upon what they call a policy of thrift, and this Old Age Pension cut is one manifestation of it. We have endeavoured to point out to the Government that they are not entitled to penalise these people who have come in advance of them by being thrifty, and I think the Government should take that matter into account. This matter has been very ably and very frequently stressed, and pointed out by Deputy Johnson in regard to voluntary thrift, so that I need not stress it now, but I would like to emphasise the point. There is another point to which I would like to draw attention. It is not a case of voluntary thrift. It is a case of compulsory thrift. Under the Unemployment Insurance Act, as the Minister is aware, every employed person is supposed to pay up unemployment insurance except agricultural workers and the domestic servants. Now, suppose we take the case of any working man who, perhaps, at the age of 20 starts to pay 1s. 7d. a week insurance and continues to pay that up to 70 years of age. That is to say, he is paying for 50 years. It is quite possible there are some employments where a man will not draw any unemployment benefit during that period of 50 years. I refer the Dáil to Section 25 A. of the Unemployment Insurance Act of 1920. That Section, cleared of superfluous legalities and boiled down into ordinary English, means that the amount of insurance that has accrued for fifty years is calculated at compound interest, and is refunded to him when he reaches that age. The Unemployment Insurance Act is a compulsory insurance of the State. I think it is agreed that money doubles itself at 5 per cent. in 14 or 15 years. I have not made the necessary calculation to find out what will be the principal and compound interest on that amount, but it would come to between £300 and £400. I ask the Minister if he is going to penalise that person because the State forces him to pay unemployment insurance? Is he going to penalise him by establishing unemployment insurance and at the end when that sum accrues is he again to be penalised in the matter of Old Age Pension? That is a matter to which I would like the Minister to give his attention. The other matter of voluntary thrift cannot be stressed much more. It is a matter which the Government does not seem to take much cognisance of, and the Government does not seem to care whether the people are thrifty or not. If they are thrifty voluntarily they penalise them under this Bill, and if they are thrifty compulsorily under this Bill they penalise them.
