318 
MINORITY REPORT. 
effected and that further improvement would follow the extension 
of medical benefit to the whole nation. ‘Illness is now coming 
under skilled observation and treatment at an earlier stage than 
wag formerly the case,” is the considered view of the British 
Medical Association, a development ‘which, however desirable 
among the insured population, must be even more desirable for 
young children and mothers. ‘The public health is the 
primary asset of the nation’s welfare, whether measured by 
capacity, employability and production or by length of days or 
by personal well-being.”” (Annual Report of the Chief Medical 
Officer, Ministry of Health, 1924, Para. 586) and * Wise pro- 
gress is not to be looked for in the curtailment of public medical 
services . . . . but for their prudent establishment and where 
necessary their extension on sound lines . . . . Public assistance, 
insurance and education are the three great principles which seem 
to lie at the foundation of a public health service.” (Para. 587). 
92. So far from agreeing with the argument that the provision 
of medical benefit to dependants would postpone or impede the 
establishment of a fully developed public medical service as fore- 
shadowed in the Majority Report, we feel confident that it would, 
on the contrary, further the realisation of that scheme. We 
therefore recommend that Medical Benefit should be provided for 
the dependants of insured persons and that the immediate ex- 
penditure should be met by the Exchequer and the local rates 
in equal proportions. 
RATES OF SICKNESS AND DISABLEMENT BENEFITS. 
93. The inadequacy of the rates of these benefits would, in 
our judgment, be sufficient reason for recommending an increase, 
but attention was drawn to the disparity between the rates of 
benefit under the National Health Insurance Act and the Unem- 
ployment Insurance Act by witnesses representing the Depart- 
ment, Friendly Societies and Trade Union Approved Societies. 
Qir Walter Kinnear referred to the difference as °° rather 
anomalous >’ and ‘as difficult to defend,” and expressed am 
opinion (Q. 473) which supports the view of the Hearts of Oak 
Benefit Society, that ‘** formerly people on the border line of 
incapacity would tend to go on the sick fund. They will not do 
s0 now, because it pays them to receive unemployment benefit *’ 
(Q. 3368). Our colleagues repeatedly express their opinion 
“that it is difficult to justify a less generous provision for the 
invalid than for the man who is in good health, whose circum- 
stances certainly involve smaller expenditure.” 
94. The necessity for uniformity in the rates of benefit does 
not dispose of the whole matter. We think it not unreasonable 
to suppose that unemployed persons will delay in obtaining 
medical advice and treatment under the Health Insurance Act, 
lest they should be disentitled to the higher rates of the Unem-