Untitled

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXIII, Issue 7694, 20 July 1886, Page 4

The result of the poll on the resolutions proposed for the future management of the Government Insurance Association was declared last evening, and, as will be seen from the report in another column the decision of the policyholders was by a large majority given in favour of the Government resuming the control. There were, it will be remembered, three resolutions submitted to the members ; the first being that proposed by Mr. Bell,, to the effect that the directing of the association's affairs should revert to the Government, and for this there voted 3183, while there voted against it 1508. The second alternative resolution of Mr. Bell was to reduce the Central Board to six members—three to be elected, and three to be permanent Government officials—the Government appointing the chairman. To this proposal, as in consequence of its complicated nature, we foreshadowed would be the case, vary scanty support was accorded—only 514 votes being in favour of it, while those recorded against it amounted to 3796. The third resolution was that of Mr. Fisher, that the Board should consist of seven members, four of whom should be elected by the policyholders, three to be nominated by the Government, but not to be in Government service, the Board having power to appoint its own chairman ; and ior this there were recorded 1717 votes and against it 2080. It will thus be seen that the contest really lay between the first and the third or the resolutions. From the outset we expected it would be so; and, while also admitting that the third was in some respects the more popular, we yet thought that, for certain reasons stated at the time, the first was deserving of greater consideration, and accordingly recommended the policyholders in the Auckland district to vote in its favour. And, as the state of the poll shows, the voting for remitting the control of the association to the Government was very decided in Auckland, much more so than

that of any other district in the colony, the numbers being 628 for and only 160 against. But, though none of the other districts returned so decisive a rote for the resumption of control by the GoYernment, they yet, with the solitary exception of Hawk6s' Bay, all returned very large majorities in its favour. This fact shows how very general and pronounced was the reaction caused by the dissatisfaction with the management of the Association's affairs since they were placed in the hands of the central Board. We congratulate the policyholders on the result of their determination to have an end put to the discordant proceedings connected with the Board, which wero operating very prejudicially to their interests. And now that matters will fall into their old course, it may be expected that public confidence in the institution will soon be restored to its former strength and that policyholders will have good reason to be satisfied with their property.