‘Relentless Slaughter’ Of Private Hospitals

Press, Volume CIV, Issue 30763, 29 May 1965, Page 16

‘Relentless Slaughter’ Of Private Hospitals

Lyndhurst Hospital, which will close tomorrow, is the latest victim in the relentless slaughter of private hospitals, says the latest issue of the New Zealand Medical Association’s publication. The publication says the reason given for closing the 23bed hospital—the largest non-denominational private maternity hospital in New Zealand —was inadequate financial support by the Government.

The matter had been the subject of protracted negotiations betracted negotiations between the hospital and the Minister of Health (Mr McKay), it says.

“The hospital has refused to make its submissions public and it is therefore not possible to judge the merits of the case,” says the publication. “It is, however, clear that the subsidies for private hospitals have not kept pace with increasing wages and costs. In spite of its election promises the Government seems to be prepared to allow the private hospitals in this country to disappear for want of financial support. “Short-sighted Policy”

“This seems a strangely short-sighted policy when one considers that private hospitals take care of one-sixth of the hospital requirements of this country and thus save the treasury at least £6m a year. The State subsidy amounts to about £2m a year and a 50 per cent increase of this subsidy would cure the financial troubles of most private hospitals, whilst still leaving the State a substantial gainer. “Unfortunately, the political equation is not as simple as the financial one. The New Zealand public pays a great deal in social security tax and

has come to expect free hospital treatment for it “Many people suspect that the existence of private hospitals is the indirect reason for long waiting lists in public hospitals. The proportion of people who willingly pay for private hospital care is steadily shrinking and even the well-to-do do not look with any great favour upon them. “Political Liability”

in front of them and who don’t care what happens to the profession afterwards are the only people who will commit us unreservedly to an allout fight in favour of private hospitals. Smaller Part “The rest of the profession, accepting the realities of this centuary and realising that private hospitals will inevitably play a smaller and smaller part in the medical care of the people, will cast around for alternative ways to preserve the independence and prosperity of specialists. Such ways can be found and since the future of specialism will be largely bound up with the big State-controlled hospitals these ways must be concerned with the status and method of remuneration of public hospital specialists. “Meanwhile, whilst supporting the demands of private hospitals for increased subsidies, we should not delude ourselves that this is more than a stop-gap measure.”

“Private hospitals are, therefore, a political liability. The department abhors them as an obstacle to their own empire-building, the Labour Party does not care for them and the National Party is prepared to let them die. Ipso facto they are also a political [liability for the medical profession. “All this is well known and only the preponderance of successful, private specialists in the councils of the B.M.A. ;has prevented us from facing ‘this extremely difficult problem realistically. “Specialists who have less i than ten years of active life