GOVERNMENT LIFE INSURANCE ASSOCIATION PROPOSALS.

Kumara Times, Issue 3023, 12 July 1886, Page 3

GOVERNMENT LIFE INSURANCE ASSOCIATION PROPOSALS.

[to the editor.] Sir —The three distinct proposals that are now submitted to the policyholders of the New Zealand Government Life Insurance Association are worthy of the grave consideration of policy-holders. The first proposal, that the business of the Association should be returned to the charge of the Government, I consider to be a retrograde step. While they are responsible for the affairs of the Association, it is only fair and right that the Goveanment should be largely represented ou the governing board; but to give the Government sole control, would be contrary to the feelings and aspirations of the age, in wishing to extend democracy, and compelling individual members of society to vote on all things in which they are specially interested. The stock argument of pessimists that the masses are unfitted to form reasonable opinions on things in general is mere rodomontade, and is not borne out by facts, at least in these colonies. Proposal No. 2 is reasonable enough till we come to the fifth clause, which gives power to the Board to grant compensation to officers on retirement, and make allowances to widows and young children of officers who die whilst in the service. Why Government servants should be compensated in a special manner by the masses who have to look out for themselves, and invariably earn less than Government servants, is what I never could understand : but especially is it absurd in the case of an association whose principal object is to provide the means whereby each individual may provide against a rainy day, or secure those dependent on him from want in case of death. Such a proposal strikes at the very root of the usefulness of the association altogether ; and if the Board were at all consistent, they would not employ officers who did not provide in some way for themselves, that is, taking for granted they had a reasonable salary. The third proposal I think meets all the requirements of the case, as it provides for a Board of seven members, three nominated by the Government and four elected by the policy-holders. This proposal is preferable to the second, as the Board would elect their own chairman, whereas, in the second proposal, he would be nominated by the Government, which would not be very satisfactory to the elected members of the Board, The importance of the subject to policy-holders is very great, and is my excuse for troubling you with this letter. A Policy-Holder, Larrikins, July 9, 1886,