Laienbrevier der National-Ökonomie

Report of the Royal Commission on National Health Insurance

Bibliographic data

Monograph

Identifikator:: 861689208

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-94745

Document type:: Monograph

Author:: Pohlman, Adolf http://d-nb.info/gnd/139782702

Title:: Laienbrevier der National-Ökonomie

Place of publication:: Leipzig

Publisher:: Voigtländer

Year of publication:: 1908

Scope:: 1 Online-Ressource (215 Seiten)

Collection:: Economics Books

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

MINORITY REPORT. 30F Cm y— responsible for the immense surpluses which Societies are now distributing in the form of additional benefits, and that the disparity in valuation results would have been the same if either the expenditure had been heavier in the aggregate or the actuarial estimate had been less generous. 29. In either of the latter events, however, the ‘statutory or normal rate of benefits of the Act would have been jeopardised to such an extent and for so large a proportion of the population as to have created a problem with which Parliament must have been compelled to deal. 30. So long as nearly every Society is able to maintain or increase the normal rates of benefit the disparities do not get the attention they otherwise would. 31. The Departmental Actuarial Committee state in para. 5 of their First Report “It is clear . . . that Parliament intended the scheme to be solvent, regarded as a whole, whatever might follow from the grouping of risks incidental to the voluntary segregation of insured persons in Approved Societies,’ and it ig further reported that the new actuarial basis referred to in the Report, ‘‘ will be that which, so far as we can estimate, would be required if the whole system were operated through a common fund.’’ 32. We think that these two quotations point to an intention of greater uniformity in the scale of benefits than has been in fact realised and we feel sure that Parliament could not have foreseen that over the whole insured population there would be a surplus of 40 to 45 million pounds, nor that the segregation of insured persons would produce such wide disparities. 33. We agree that on the whole the administration by Approved Societies has been of a high standard and that many of the grounds for criticism are due to the weakness of the system and not to any incapacity upon the part of the officers of the Societies. At the same time we are compelled to say that there are no methods of judging the real standard of efficiency of Societies. A standard which passes the Treasury auditors is a criterion only as to accuracy in accounting and in a lesser degree as to the legal accuracy of the work done. There is no test, other than that made in individual cases in which complaint is made to the Minister, as to whether benefit is paid to every member who is properly entitled to it. An auditor may discover an irregular payment, but he cannot discover an irregular non- payment. 34. We are led to draw attention to this by the often-repeated Statement that the Approved Society system provides an incentive to good management. If such an incentive exists we fear that its product must be stringent management against which no system

Access restriction

Copyright

Full text: Report of the Royal Commission on National Health Insurance

Monograph

Table of contents

Download

Monograph

Chapter

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation