)()¢

MAJORITY REPORT.

cannot be said to be reasonably able ’’ to do so if all the
circumstances of his illness are taken into consideration. 1t
has accordingly been represented to us that the proviso should
be amended so that members will not be penalised in cases of
this type by reason of delay in furnishing notice of illness.
483. We are impressed by the considerations which have been
submitted to us in this respect, and recommend that the proviso
to sub-section (4) of Section 13 of the Act should be amended
in the following sense : ** Provided that, if the Society or Committee
 administering the benefit consider, or if in the case of a
dispute it is decided in manner provided by this Act, that having
regard to the circumstances of his incapacity, the insured person
had reasonable excuse for his failure to give notice . . . &c.”

DURATION OF SICKNESS BENEFIT AND LINKING-UP ILLNESSES.
484. Tt is provided by Section 13 (5) of the Act that in calculating
 the maximum period of 26 weeks for which sickness
benefit is payable, any illness which begins within twelve months
of the termination of a previous illness is to be treated as a continuation
 of that illness. Further the linking-up provisions
have regard to any illness in respect of which the insured person
could have claimed benefit, irrespective of whether benefit was
in fact claimed. This provision, we are informed, mafy operate
harshly in the case of a person who is ill for a short period in each
year during a number of consecutive years (Kinnear, Q. 345-349 ;
Manchester Unity of Oddfellows, Q. 6079-6081), and we understand
 that certain Societies have habitually made detailed
inquiries of employers with a view to determining whether
a member claiming sickness benefit has had an odd da
or two of incapacity during the preceding twelve months which
would justify them in applying the provision in question (Kinnear,
Q. 23,491).
485. A suggestion was made to us by the Ministry of Health
as to an amendment of Section 13(5) of the Act, and we quote
the following from the evidence of Sir Walter Kinnear :
““ This position operates harshly in the case of a person who is
ill for a short period in each year, and the hardship is one which
increases as the person grows older. It does mot appear to be
equitable that a week’s sickness at some previous date should
make the possible difference between 26 weeks of sickness benefit
and 26 weeks of disablement benefit for a subsequent incapacity,
and it seems desirable to avoid any inducement to an insured
person to delay claiming benefit in order to secure a title to sickness
 instead of disablement benefit . . . . . . It is suggested that
Section 13(5) might be amended so as to provide that for
linking-up purposes any period of 12 months during which the
insured person has not received benefit in respect of more than
six days of incapacitly should be regarded as a vear free frem