The amendment of the Friendly Societies Act which Deputy Cowan is suggesting in this Bill appears to be a desirable one. As he mentioned, the Act was passed in 1896 and the value of money has changed considerably since then. The £100 limit fixed in Section 56 of that Act, as the maximum amount which could be paid by such a society on the deathof a member to a person nominated by him could reasonably be raised now to £300.
As the Deputy says, some consequential amendments would be necessary—one directly in Section 57 where the same amount is mentioned and another in Section 8. Section 8 of the Act provides that a friendly society which contracts for the assurance of a gross sum exceeding £200 per annum, or an annuity exceeding £50 per annum, may not be registered under the Friendly Societies Acts. If the amount which may be nominated is increased to £300, it would be anomalous to maintain this limitation in Section 8, so the £200 limit should also be raised to £300.
Apart from these consequential amendments, as it is proposed to legislate for amending the Friendly Societies Acts, there are certain other changes which might be made and which I would suggest the Committee should consider. Section 57 (3) of the Act provides that where, on the death of a nominator, the amount payable to the nominee exceeds £80, a certificate that death duties have been paid must be produced to the friendly society before payment can be made to the nominee.
The level at which liability to death duties arises has been raised considerably since 1896, and, under the law as it stands, death duty does not commence to be payable below £2,000. It would, therefore, appear to be desirable to dispense completely with that provision of the Act and I may say that I have consulted the Revenue Commissioners and have got their agreement to that course. Another sub-section of Section 57, dealing with the giving by the Revenue Commissioners of receipts for death duties can also be repealed.
There are other provisions which I have been considering, but upon which I have not yet got the final views of the Revenue Commissioners. These are the provisions in Sections 58 and 69, and the question whether these sections should be deleted or amended, so as to take into account the point at which liability to death duty arises inpresent day conditions, is also being considered. By the time the Bill has been considered in Committee, I will have completed the examination of that matter, in the light of the views expressed by the Revenue Commissioners.
So far as I am concerned, I think it is a good thing that some Deputy took the initiative of proposing this change. It is a type of change which should be made, in view of the alteration in circumstances since the original Act was passed, but something which a Government Department, concerned with more pressing matters, might not consider. In fact, as a point of interest, I should say that there have been very few cases at all in which even the £100 limit appeared to have imposed any hardship, because most of the sums payable on the death of a member to the person he nominates have been substantially less.
