AN INSURANCE MAN'S OPINION.

Otago Witness, Issue 2861, 13 January 1909, Page 30

AN INSURANCE MAN'S OPINION.

. THE PBOBABLE RISK. (Fkom Ous Ot?n Cobhespondent.) WELLINGTON, January 10. " What is your opinion of the action )f the Government in deciding to iillemnify ths State Insurance Department igainst loss for policies covering pneumo:onio.?i&?" was a question put by a Post' •eporter to a gentleman prominent in nsurance circles. " What Government?" he demanded, In ■e-ply. "There is no Government in this :ountry. The miners' executive is the government ! I would point out to you hat it is not the Slate Insurance Departaent that has decided to take the risk,"i© continued. " Tb« alleged Government s doing it- I have never heard of aucM , thing. What right has the Government 0 indemnify the State Department, Why loes it not do the same in respect of the >rivate companies or the employers? It,' ? all very tvell to suggest that the prd"•ision relating to this disease will be epealcd next session, but if the miners/ xecutive is strong enough to force its temands to-day, what possible hope caiu Her« be that the executive will consent

next year to give up something it has ] already obtained? People really do not fcSiow the extent of the risk involved by compensation for miner's complaint. I venture to say that at Reefton alone the risk can be reckoned at anything from £80,000 to £100,000. If the Government I had stood firm for another 10 days, and it I was officially stated ,that it would stand firm and would not give a. blank cheque — the very thing it has now decided to do — the miners would have submitted themselves to a medical examination. That would have satisfied the insurance companies. We have no objection to accepting a risk when we know the extent of the risk, but why should a mining company be responsible for compensation in the case of a man who is found to be suffering from the disease, but who in all probability contracted it m some other mine? It would be just as reasonable to say that an employer engaged in any industry should) be liable to pay compensation in respect of any disease found amongst his hands. We have no objection whatever to taking risks and paying compensation on cases where the disease has been contracted after a clean bill of health has been obtained.' On being asked what the insurance companies were doing, the same authority said he could only speak for himself, but the companies would, no doubt, hold a conference. Opinions were being obtained from leading lawyers as to whether the liability under the act was retrospective. Personally, he thought it was. " The insurance companies," he said, "are prepared i to throw over the mining business they hold, and cancel ihe policies they hold at any time, and when the State Department has secured a monopoly the employers will ] find out what sort of a premium they will I have to pay. With competition, rates ! could be kept down." The same authority •pointed out that Ihe State Insurance business was one concern. If the compensation ! to be paid turned out to be a bigger j burden than had been anticipated, what ] of the policy-holders in the life insurance branch? "The board," he said, "consists of officials. The policy-holders in the life branch have no one to represent them. We advised the employers that we would not accept risks which included pneumo- I coniosis, and the Government Department . actually did the same. Now the hands of the Government have been forced." THE EMPLOYERS' VIEW. Mr Pryor (secretary to the Employers' Federation) states that employers " are greatly surprised at the Government's action. He adds : — " The general feeling is that the position of the mine owners is not in any way improved, if it is not even made worse, by the proposal under present conditions. The owners who have not employed men under the new act have not at present incurred any liability in 4 connection with it, but if they accept the Government's offer the arrangement with j the Government Accident Insurance Department will more than probably be of a temporary nature, and if it happens that Parliament does not amend the act in a way satisfactory to the employers, they will find themselves in the position of having assumed liability under the act and, i it may be, are not able to get the neces- j eary" protection from either the Govern- , ment Department or the other insurance I companies. The^ position is so serious and the matter of such great importance that, acting under instructions, I have referred the whole matter to Mr C. P. Skerrett, K.C., for his opinion, and a meeting of , the advisory board of the federation will ' be held on Monday to consider the question."