In the author's 1955 paper an attempt was made to divide mortality into six component parts, one being the rate of senescent deaths, the others the respective rates of different types of anticipated deaths, the distinction between senescent and anticipated deaths having previously been drawn by Clarke in his centenary paper. At the same time the author advocated an investigation into the mortality of assured lives by cause of death, one of the uses of such investigation being the continuous availability of a comparison between assured lives' mortality at different durations and national mortality. The Joint Mortality Investigation Committee is indeed now conducting such an investigation, starting with the year of experience 1964 and, though no report on this investigation has yet been published, it is reasonable to presume that the Committee's first such report will become available in the fairly near future.

The attention of actuaries was directed to problems of population and resources in part of a paper read to the Institute in 1956. The general character of these problems has not changed during the past eleven years. Our understanding of the matters at issue has become deeper, however, as the result of new research. One way and another, a great deal has been written on the subject—sometimes revealing less about population than about the writer's philosophy or beliefs. In the English language alone, several hundred new references have been added to the list in recent years, and many of these have been read by the authors, whose original intention was to write a critical review of the latest literature. Recent writings are so diversified over a wide area of inquiry, however, that sharp disagreements are relatively few. In these circumstances, an expository treatment seems more appropriate than a critical appreciation of controversies, though ranges of views on particular topics can be discussed.

There has been some discussion in recent years of how best to distribute to with-profit policyholders the benefits which have been derived from investment in equity shares. Normally the practical problem which confronts an office is how to adapt its existing bonus system to distribute these benefits fairly and most of the discussion has been on this problem (as, for example, in the paper by Benz, ‘Some Notes on Bonus Distributions by Life Offices,’ J.I.A. 86, 1).

Since the idea of a wage-related national pension scheme was first launched in tangible form by the publication in 1957 of the Labour Party's ‘National Superannuation’ plan there has been a state of uneasy coexistence between national and occupational pension schemes in the United Kingdom. Social security systems providing not merely basic flat-rate benefits, but also benefits related to earnings, had been in existence for some years in other European countries, but it was not until the National Insurance Act, 1959 took effect in April 1961 that a national graduated pension scheme became a reality in the United Kingdom. Established at a modest level and designed primarily as a means of raising revenue to meet the rising outgo on flat-rate benefits, this graduated scheme has never seemed likely to endure in its original form. Nevertheless the National Insurance Act, 1966 has grafted on to it a scheme to provide short-term graduated sickness, unemployment and widows' benefits.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an opportunity for discussion within our profession of ‘the use of an actuarial approach and actuarial evidence’ in the assessment of damages arising out of personal injury and fatal accident litigation. The need for such a paper was intimated in the pages of our Journal by William Phillips in his Review of Principles of the Law of Damages by Professor Harry Street. Since the publication of what Phillips described as ‘from the actuarial point of view…the most important legal textbook which has been published in the last 50 years’ the employment of actuaries in this field has been widely discussed within the legal profession. The most important recent development has been the inclusion of personal injury litigation as Item VI of the first programme of the Law Commission set up by the Law Commission Act, 1965. The words quoted in the first sentence above are taken from the list of ‘Questions for Examination’ under (b) of Item VI, ‘Assessment of Damages’. The current examination being conducted by the Law Commission makes this a particularly appropriate time for a sessional meeting on this subject. The writer has had the advantage of a sight of a preliminary Working Paper prepared by the Law Commission and will be quoting certain extracts from that paper below. It must however be stressed that the Working Paper is a preliminary one which attempts to do no more than canvass views: it in no way sets out the conclusions of the Law Commission on the matters discussed.

This paper is concerned with attempts that have been made to incorporate measures of risk in the selection of financial investments. The methodology that is developed here has been primarily aimed at the evaluation of capital investment projects, but the concepts and ideas are also relevant in the financial investment field. Implicit in all this discussion is the fact that when information is obtained in order to calculate an internal rate of return or a net present value, the figures put into the calculation are estimates rather than precise and exact quantities. In some instances the estimates may be felt to be very good, whilst in other cases it may be felt that there is a wide range of possible deviations. Hence the evaluation of any project or projects should, correctly, be described not by a single criterion but by a range of possible values, some of which are judged to be more likely than others. Having said this, there now comes the need to decide upon the method by which choice is to be exercised. Should it be by the choice of the highest average value of the criterion, or by choosing some more conservative rule?