The point I wanted to put to the Minister last night was a very simple one. I think he exaggerated the difficulties in regard to the making of an actuarial valuation. The situation is now very different from what it was in 1943. That year, as the Minister is aware, was the height of the war period, when every British Government Department was engaged upon the war effort. For the purpose of having an actuarial valuation made as on the 31st December, 1943, it was necessary for us to have recourse to the British Actuary, as our predecessors had to have recourse before us in relation to the actuarial valuations which they made from time to time. In addition to that, every branch of our own administration was overburdened with the task of dealing with the particular problems thrown up by the war. Because of that it was difficult to procure the data necessary to enable an actuarial valuation to be made.
The position has changed completely since then. It has changed fundamentally. The Minister now has at his disposal in his own Department a qualified actuary; he was formerly an officer of the Department of Finance who, in his own time, qualified as an actuary, and was subsequently released for training in the Office of the British Actuary with a view to making his services available to the Government for the particular purpose provided in the Act of 1942. I suggest it is not really fair to the House or to the public, who will eventually evaluate the proposals the Minister will submit to them for a comprehensive insurance scheme on the basis of the information the Minister will give them and which, in fact, he ought to be supplying to them now.
I have said — and this touches the matter immediately — that the one thing that is lacking in the White Paper which the Minister has published dealing with social security is statistical data upon which an evaluation of that scheme can be made. One of the essential elements in that scheme is the actuarial position of the National Health Insurance Society. These essential facts the members of the Oireachtas and the general public should have before them when they are discussing and criticising the Minister's proposed social welfare scheme. I can see no reason whatsoever for dispensing with the actuarial valuation. On the contrary, I think it is more important than ever that we should have that information. Why was it considered necessary to have the actuarial valuation made in respect of the National Health Insurance Society itself except to demonstrate the fundamental soundness of the scheme originally? Does the Minister now take the view that it does not matter whether his scheme and his proposal are sound or unsound; he will steam-roll them through the Dáil with the support of those elements in the Coalition who are supposed to be business-men and who are supposed to look after the interests of the taxpayers of this country? Is that why he wants to dispense with this?
I suggest that the Minister should reconsider the position and decide that an actuarial valuation will be made as at the 31st December, 1948. That is a very convenient date. It marks, so to speak, the close of one administrative period and the opening of another one. If the actuarial valuation discloses that the position of the society is not as sound as it ought to be, the Minister's predecessors — I am sure he will be glad to hear this — will have to carry the major share of the blame for that. But we are not afraid of this investigation even if it shows us to have been bad administrators; we can be blamed and we are prepared to accept the blame. We want the people to know the truth and to have the facts. I cannot see any reason whatsoever why this essential information should be withheld from them. It is quite easy for the Minister to have that actuarial valuation made. It is essential that it should be made before he prepares a comprehensive social insurance scheme because the rates of contribution must inevitably be based upon the actuarial experience of the National Health Insurance Society. If he does not have that experience properly expressed in actuarial terms, I fail to see how he can prepare any proposals worth the consideration of his colleague, the Minister for Finance. For that reason, therefore, I would very strongly urge the Minister to accept this amendment to Section 19 and to delete sub-section (1) as proposed.