STATE FIRE INSURANCE

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVII, Issue 8357, 18 February 1913, Page 6

STATE FIRE INSURANCE

Tho peculiar attitude of self-styled Reform towards the measures of real reform which they inherited from the Liberals is not without humour. iho financial results of the operations of the State Fire Insurance Office during last year show a net profit exceeding £14,000. With characteristic assurance the Hon. F. M. B. Fisher, who is tho Minister in charge of tho department, quotes this as “an effective answer to those critics who declared that the Reform Government would kill State enterprise.” This is surely somewhere near high-water mark in the direction of impudence. To try to secure credit to the Conservatives for the success of an institution whose creation all their forces were exercised to prevent may lie in keeping with tho nature of “Reform,” but will certainly strike most people as a sharp departure from the paths of consistency or of political honesty. This particular Minister, we know, does not care a straw about consistency—holds it in scornful contempt, in fact, as the refuge of fools. Perhaps that matters very little,' seeing that Mr Fisher is—well, is Mr Fisher. But how do his principal colleagues stand in this matter ? How do the magnificent results of State fire insurance affect them? Wo venture to suggest that the figures quoted by the Minister with such apparent pride constitute more than anything else an effective answer to those critics who declared that this particular State enterprise was unnecessary, dangerous, Socialistic, and certain to involve the country in heavy less. Mr Fisher’s announcement is a direct and striking impeachment of Mr Massey, who said when tho authorising Bill was before Parliament that the new departure was not worth what it was likely to cost the country; of Mr Allen, who declared tho Bill was not worth the paper it was written on, that tho scheme would not reduce premiums, that the colony should pause before incurring the risks involved, that it was really 1 introduced to benefit certain individuals; of Mr Duthie, who said they were asked to “plunge” into this business to increase the Government’s powers of patronage; of Sir William Bussell, who would have preferred the abolition of the Government Life Insurance Department; of Sir Walter Buchanan, who said the community could get on very well without such “Government interference.” These gentlemen are the real apostles of what we are asked to regard as “Reform.” They are the bulwarks of Conservatism in New Zealand, the pillars of the party, beside whoso place and influence in the political constitution Mr Fisher’s career is an ephemeral circumstance. TEe results of State fire insurance in this country are really splendid, and if Mr Fisher or his friends sympathised with the undertaking he would have made out a much better case than ho did in publishing the latest records. Instead of involving the country in heavy loss the Office has cost the State not one penny piece, but on the contrary has yielded in tho last three years profits aggregating nearly £28,000. Whereas Mr Allen prophesied that premiums would not be reduced, it is an admitted fact that the public has benefited by reduced charges to the extent of £1,250,000, if, not more. Only one member of the present Cabi-net-only one member of the Conservative party (Mr Herries) —voted for tho second reading of the State Fire Insurance Bill enacted by the Seddon Government. Had those who now style themselves “Reformers” had their way, the insuring public would have been £1,250,000 out of pocket to-day and the Treasury would have been short of the profits that have been made. _ The honours belong entirely to. the Liberal party, though it would be unjust to overlook the very capable and diligent work of tho present general manager, Mr C. B. Bobieson, who has.allied efficiency with enthusiasm. The only way in which the “Reformers” are affected by the returns we published yesterday is that they are once more revealed as bad judges, false prophets, discredited enemies of popular and genuine reform. Any . attempt to decorate themselves with laurels rightly belonging to the Opposition will merely make the Conservatives appear more ridiculous than ever in the estimation of all possessing even an elementary' knowledge of our political history. As for the Reform Government killing this enterprise, as Mr Fisher says was expected, that is more than they dare suggest. They may have the will to do so, but they most undoubtedly lack the necessary courage. -