Report of the Royal Commission on National Health Insurance

Bibliographic data

Monograph

Identifikator:: 1740277147

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-132094

Document type:: Monograph

Title:: Report of the Royal Commission on National Health Insurance

Place of publication:: London

Publisher:: Stationery Office

Year of publication:: 1926

Scope:: XII, 394 S.

Digitisation:: 2020

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

Chapter

Document type:: Monograph

Structure type:: Chapter

Title:: Chapter XIII. Miscellaneous questions

Collection:: Economics Books

268 MAJORITY REPORT made in exercise of that power and do not appear to be a flagrant abuse thereof.” He also states that ‘‘ in view of the terms of the section, auditors have been unable to raise objection to sub- scriptions on the ground of absence of consideration or because an inadequate return was either contracted for or actually received for the payment.’ 661. Mr. Alban Gordon (App. XIII, 30; Q. 7733, 7813-7818) suggests that the section should be retained, but that in order to prevent abuse, it might be amended to provide that payments in excess of a prescribed sum per head of the membership in any year shall be subject to the consent of the Department. The United Women’s Insurance Society, of which Mr. Alban Gordon is the Secretary (App. XXIV; 11-12; Q. 10,188-10,185), make a similar recommendation. This Society also inform us that during the years 1914-1924 they spent a sum of no less than £51,500 under the section. The National Federation of Rural Approved Societies (App. XXIX, 20; Q. 11,687-11,690) and the Scottish Rural Workers’ Approved Society (Q. 11,781-11,788) are opposed to the repeal of the section, which they say has proved useful for providing treatment and appliances in necessitous cases. The Joint Committee of Approved Societies (App. XIV, 385, 91-108; Q. 8726-8728) also think that the section should be allowed to stand. They contend that it has not endangered the financial position of Societies and is useful for meeting cases of special need. 662. The use made of the section has undoubtedly gone far beyond the original intention of the legislature, and while we recognise the motives which originally prompted Societies to provide benefits in the manner indicated, we consider that any need for such payments has now passed, seeing that the benefits may be provided as additional benefits. 663. We consider, however, that the power vested in Societies to make small subscriptions or donations to hospitals and similar charitable institutions should be retained, but that any such payments should not be made except out of realised surpluses, and that they should be made under some degree of central control. 664. We therefore recommend that the Section should be repealed, and that provision should be made whereby a Society may, when formulating a scheme of additional benefits, allocate a specific sum out of the disposable surplus for the purpose of making payments to charitable institutions, this provision to be submitted as part of the Scheme and to be subject to the same scrutiny and control by the Central Department as are the proposals for additional benefits. We also think it desirable to define in fairly precise terms what constitutes a charitable institution. We do not consider that any institution should be eligible to receive payments unless it derives a substantial part

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: Report of the Royal Commission on National Health Insurance

Monograph

Chapter

Table of contents

Download

Monograph

Chapter

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation