EARTHQUAKE INSURANCE

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XXIV, Issue 212, 21 August 1934, Page 6

EARTHQUAKE INSURANCE

I . Barnard’s Bill Discussed \ bnef discussion on the Earthquake I’ 11lection Bill now before Parliament v w indulged in by members of the 1 -linga Chamber of Commerce last entng, and the general feeling appeared to be that although the bill in its present form may have defects, yet it will be greatly worth while to have tiie principle set out in the bill •'t nblished as a ground for building up a more complete and adequate si hemo of protection. Mr W. E. Bate, who presided, rein nked that insurers would have to I a little more on their premiums, I "it he believed that the cost of colli i-t ion would be very small. The insurance companies would act as collectors for the Government, and would receive a small commission. That? 1 > 'imt that no new Government deI rtment would be brought into existMr W. A. Whitlock said that in his b lief the bill was weak in that it did i ot set out fully enough how the protection fund was to be administered, li iw damage was to be assessed, and ■ hat proportion of loss was to be paid •rt to each insurer. In the event of ; large-scale disaster, the losses might be three times as great as the fund ro'ild meet. Mr A. C. A. Hyde remarked that nithough the bill had its imperfections, . those who were sponsoring it were l i en to get the principle of protection established. There were some parts which perhaps were weak, but at this juncture the main consideration was that the principle should be upheld.