I would have thought, if the Canadian Association of Mutual Insurance Companies felt this was a necessary precondition to demutualization of any company, the government would have had a better reason than just taking care of it in regulations, and doing it by case by case.
Obviously the companies themselves are concerned about inequities that may well be generated by virtue of just simply leaving it to the backrooms of regs. So I'm still having trouble understanding why, if the mutual insurance industry—and I'm assuming these folks do represent the industry—are saying there is a need for protection of all policyholders, eligible or otherwise, by means of a notice or a vote and a special meeting.... If the industry is saying that, and if the industry is saying this is a necessary protection for all policyholders, really the government should have some darn good reason why this isn't necessary.