ANOTHER SURRENDER.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 401, 9 January 1909, Page 4

ANOTHER SURRENDER.

The country 'will learn with amazement tp-clay that the Government has decided' that the State Insurance Department ' will'; issuc-'pohcicß covering miners',. 'frisks", .without requiring 1 'a-- preliminary; medical examination. "'Were -it not: that Sir Joseph Ward himself supplied the text of the message in which ;he'; has communicated this decision to the miners,;wo should have found it difficult to believe 1 that the Government had decided upon a course of action .-which Was rejected, as improper; by Bin Joseph Ward and Mb, Millar .'only a few days ago, and .which the.' leading newspapers, irrespective .of their political .' views, united; ih' v saying could not be entertained.. • Mr. Millar said that the proposal that the Government; Insurance * Department' should take over . the new' risks created by the Compensation Aqt without requiring a modioli'examination "practically asked the Government to give a blank cheque to cover all-cases of miners' phthisis at the oresont time." 1

"'.'fit was ; impossible;' therefore,'.' he said, '"for the Government to undertake an unknown liability. Ho regretted •that' it/was '.impossible' to ' comply ,iyith,' ; the ' request, Moiiey 'which was . of . the people' of: New 'Zealand .as ' -would' be re-

quired to be' used for the' purpose, 'whereas: Parliament -intended the mine- owners... re-; ceiving ■ profit from the miners' labour, toi indemnify the men from loss. by injury: caused .through disease .incidental: to' their work. ' Mr. Millar. sawiio.way of preventing trouble except -by both" sides. waiving the provision of the olfiuso affecting the questionuntil Parliament ,mot.■. Ifthis could not boarranged; what must be, 1 must ;be:' .lie was 'sorry to' hear.' that, trouble.;''threatone(l„ie eventuate,' but the Government could not be placed-in a-false'position?':'';.' v'

One' of. Our local > in, applaud ing this 'sound argument, declared .that "any other deoisiori"; haye; ■ struck a serious blow at the credit not i ohly of the Government Insurance De- • partmont, but of overy phaso.of State on- . torprise." Our other contemporary considered that it was•'!a<. testimonial to the that it refused• "to interfere' with the rational working of an important Department," and boldly added that "if there is to" be an attempt by paralysing the coal trade, to force, tho ' : Sta'te- to ; grant, insurance;, against unknown risks,' the duty of the Government'.will be plain." .Even the .Ministerialist organ in Christchurch took up a quito unequivocal attitude, by declaring that: "the suggestion that tho Govern-: • ment Accident Insurance ; Department should undertake the risk without a preliminary- examination' is not likely to 'help - towards a,' settlement, because ,the State is Abound to conduct ".its' insurance on business lines, .and it. will be no more willing than the companies are toVaccept, a liability, concerning, the extent of ..which'" it has no knowledge."; ; , The Government has now decided to reverse the decision-which earned this : applause. ; The': Department is toaccept any, kind >of; : risk without insisting: ;on, • medical'' examination,: and; ; its, funds :wiil •be 'guaranteed .against any-resultant loss, by: placing the burdon on the unfortunate taxpayefi- What defence: the Government can put forward for' utilising the public funds to make good the losses that may bo incurred by misusing, a State Department in this fashion wo are at a loss to imagine. The .Prime Minister has simply decided, in his anxiety to placate the miners, to indemnify the Insurance Department for taking, up business which •'the Department has already refused as unsound, -and which tho Department could not take up without condemning itself as a reckless institution' deserving of i instant abolition. Sir Joseph Ward may 'urge,that he has satisfied himself that the Act is so defective that the risks taken up are not risks at all. That, at all events, is to bo deduced from his observation a few days ago that if the nullity of: the vital clause were' a fact the difficultycould be "promptly settlfed." In that case, why did the Insurance Department still insist, as Sir Joseph Ward men-

itioned in, the telegram to: Mb.' ..Semple

which we printed yesterday, that it was "unable to accept -the unknown responsibility involved in the proposal to insure miners without medical examination" 1 The Government'sdecision is a decision to use the taxpayers' money to stop the clamour and satisfy the demands of a noisy body of unionists; If it be replied that there is no real financial risk; we rejoin that the Insurance Department should be left to judge of that. If there is a real financial risk—'and the interview which we print in another column suggests that the risk may be far heavier than people imagine—the Government might just as well have agreed to pay each miner a lump sum to go back to work. Reliance—confidont relianceis placed, to be sure, "on the honour 6f the miners that none but bona f ide claims will be made." Could anything bo more laughable than this pitiful hopo that Labour. ">hich has oaco mora demon-

strated its ability to squeeze the Government, will, use its power mercifully? The public cannot but feel seriously alarme.d at this fresh surrender to militant Lab" our—a surrender which Has ttio specially alarming feature of being based upon a .misuse of the public funds.