MAJORITY REPORT. 
as 7s. 6d. has been thought reasonable. A statutory limit would 
have to be above 5s., and would tend to be regarded as normal. 
The problem is to get Societies to adopt a reasonable balance 
between the amounts allocated to cash increases and to treatment 
benefits, respectively. I think that the powers of the Minister, 
in regard to approval of schemes of additional benefits, are 
sufficient to enable a check to be applied in practice on the 
extent of increases in cash benefits.”” (Q. 23,458.) 
602. While it will be seen from the quotations given above 
that there is a considerable volume of evidence from representa- 
tives of Friendly Societies in favour of imposing a statutory 
limit on the amount by which cash benefits might be increased 
by way of additional benefit, we feel that regard must be had 
to the considerations which influence the Societies in this point 
of view. It was evident to us, and was, indeed, frankly 
admitted by some witnesses, that this suggested restriction was 
largely, if not entirely, advanced in the interests of the voluntary 
side of the Societies concerned, and was based on the feeling 
that the larger the amount of benefit obtainable under National 
Health Insurance, the less scope would there be for supple- 
menting that insurance by voluntary insurance through the 
private sides of Friendly Societies. We recognise the force of 
this argument, and we have no desire to depreciate or to place 
any unnecessary restriction upon the great work which voluntary 
Friendly Societies have done and are still doing in the encourage- 
ment of thrift. We cannot, however, overlook the fact that 
these Societies include only a fraction of the whole insured 
Population and that, particularly at more advanced ages, it is 
Not possible, except by payment of an almost prohibitive rate 
of contribution, for an insured person, who is not already a 
Member of a Friendly Society, to make voluntarily such pro- 
Vision as he may desire for supplementing the benefit obtainable 
under the State insurance. 
603. We are informed that very few Societies provide for 
an increase of more than 5s. in the rate of sickness benefit 
(with proportionate increases of the other cash benefits) and 
that there is, moreover, a growing tendency on the part of 
Societies, in framing schemes of additional benefits, to allocate 
Sums to benefits in the nature of treatment rather than to provide 
large cash increases. 
. 604. While we do not favour any arbitrary restriction of the 
Nght of Societies to dispose of their surplus funds in accordance 
With the wishes of their members, we think that Societies, in 
formulating their schemes of additional benefits, should properly 
haye regard, on the one hand, to the danger of over-insurance, 
ind, on the other, to the disparity between the rates of sickness 
benefit and unemployment benefit. We are informed that the 
Practice of the Department in cases where a Society proposes 
54TH 
i