4.) MAJORITY REPORT akin to medical benefit should be entrusted as far as possible to the bodies which are responsible for the administration of that benefit. CRITICISM OF THE ADDITIONAL BENEFIT SYSTEM. 80. Many of the criticisms made on the provision of treat- ment benefits as additional benefits under the Act are directed to the fundamental characteristics of the system under which insured persons are grouped in Approved Societies. That subject is dealt with later in Chapters VIII and IX. Other criticisms are expressed on the following grounds. 81. These benefits are not given by all Societies, and even among the societies giving them there is it is stated not merely no uniformity in the additional benefits given, but there is also a wide and undesirable variety in the treatment, services and appliances included, and in the arrangements for part payment by the recipients. In other words, there is neither unformity in the selection of benefits nor in the content of the same benefit as given by different societies with the result, it is said, that there 1s widespread confusion in the minds of the members as to what precisely their rights are. Further, we are told that the arrangements made between societies and professional bodies are wanting in authority and uniformity, and in some cases are accompanied by undesirable conditions. Here we need only point out that the promotion of an additional benefit to the rank of a normal benefit would remove many of these features since in that event its administration, as in the case of medical benefit, would be placed in the hands of the Insurance Committees or their successors. We will now take the various additional benefits which are in intention of a medical nature and consider for each its present method of operation. DENTAL BENEFIT, 82. For dental treatment as an additional benefit about £332,000 (including unspent balances carried forward from previous years) was available in England alone in the year 1924 and nearly the whole of this amount was spent in that year. In some Societies the benefit included extractions and fillings but not dentures, in others the position was reversed. There was also great divergence in the proportions of the cost borne by the Society and the member respectively. Some Societies paid the whole cost, other half, others again even less. A very wide latitude was allowed under the first schemes to Societies in the arrangements made regarding the scope of the benefit, the scale of charges, the proportion payable and the agreements with selected groups of dentists.