FIRE BRIGADES.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXVII, Issue 226, 21 September 1906, Page 3

FIRE BRIGADES.

GOVERNMENT BILL CRITICISED.

INSURANCE COMPANIES AXD

FIE.E PREVENTION

(By Telegraph.—Parliamentary Reporter.)

WELLINGTONS this day.

The second reading of the Fire Brigades Bill, which originated in the Lower House, was moved in the Legislative Council yesterday by the Attorney-Gen-eral, who said that where volunteer fire brigades turned out and saved thousands of pounds' worth of property from destruction they should receive some remuneration for their work. Thp bill had been resisted by the insurance companies and the municipal authorities in the past, but he was convinced it was a good measure.

The Hon. H. F. Wigram disapproved of the principle of making insurance companies contribute, and to taking of the control of the fire brigades out of the hands of the city authorities. The bill was economically and vexatiously wrong. There were too many of these local bodies already. The Council would justify their existence by throwing out the bill as a most illogical measure. The duty of insurance companies was not to maintain fire brigades. The insurance companies assured those talcing out risks with them against loss by fire, but they did not assure their policy-holders as to the prevention of fire. The Australian colonies appeared to have decided that insurance companies should be made to contribute to the cost of fire brigades, a thing which was done in no other part: of the world save in the city of London. There were insurance companies doum business here who had no fixed headqun: ters, and who would not be liable to c<> , tribute to the upkeep of fire brigades in the colony. He intended to move that Clause 11 should be altered to provide that one-seventh of the estimated annual expenditure of a Board should be paid by the Colonial Treasurer, threesevenths by the insurance companies, and three-sevenths by the local authority. He also intended to move a new clause making it compulsory under pain of a heavy fine for the Board to keep secret the information collected by it, and another empowering the Board to set up salvage corps. The Hon. S. Thorne George said he thought tile measure was one of the most illogical that could possibly be brought down to the Council. It was not the business of fire insurance companies to pay a large portion of the cost of maintenance of brigades. If the bill was carried out to the extent they all hoped to see, it would make fire brigades perfect institutions, so that there wou,ld be hardly any tires at all. At any rate, immediately a lire started the system of suppression would be so good that it would be almost extinguished at once. This would mean that the loss by fire would under the bill gradually become smaller and smaller, consequently people would not require to insure their properties as against fire risks. There was, however, another reason why this measure was wrong and illogical. They were asking the fire insurance companies to pay half the cost of the maintenance of the brigades, the municipalities being called on to pay the other half. Onehalf the people did not take the prudent course of taking out a risk over their property that others did., and the latter would therefore be paying twice—first of all by the amount paid by the- municipal itj', and secondly by the amount paid by the insurance companies. This was not right. In Australia fire insurance companies were made to contribute to the cost of brigades, but that was not so in the Old Country, with the exception of the city of London. In the city of Wellington the corporation paid £3t)!)2 a year towards the maintenance of its brigade, yet under the bill wnat proportion would the Government pay towards that? The recent Municipal Conference had opposed the bill, and he thought the Council would be justified in throwing

it out. The Hon. T. Kelly, with a fine display of sarcasm, said he was sure the Hon. Mr. George had been very unjust to the insurance companies. Personally, he could say he had had Ms insurance reduced by one-half in the last two wears (the Hon. Mγ. Jones: "The State Fire") and that without asking. He thought the bill was a good and reasonable one. The Hon. W. Beehan, who also supported the bill, said it was only to be expected that those interested in insurance companies would say the measure was economically wrong. State Fire Insurance had at first been said to be economically wrong.

in replying, the Attorney-General said that it had been maintained that the brigades would be worse off under the bill than they were at present. On the contrary, they ■would be much better on". The sum and substance of the whole opposition to the bill was the fact that the insurance companies were asked to contribute to the cost of the brigades.

The second reading of the bill was agreed to by 21 votes to 5.