Sombre message given

Press, 15 December 1983, Page 2

Sombre message given

A sombre message was given yesterday about the finances of the North Canterbury Hospital Board. Warnings that the board might have to reduce some services were repeated at a finance committee meeting. The board’s director of finance, Mr D. B. Herman, said that last month had seen a disappointing reversal in the improving state of finances. Including planned savings, the board was $702,845 overspent for the first eight months of the financial year. Salaries and wages were $268,810 over budget and supplies and expenses $746,253 in the red. The committee’s chairman, Mr D. H. Lawrence, said that some restriction of services seemed inevitable. “It is a very sombre message that is given to us

at this time of good will,” he said. Mr Herman said the board seemed unlikely to reach its targeted $1.9 million planned savings this year to fund new developments. It was also possible it would get less money from the Government next financial year. Once the basic Government allocation was known, the board should start considering possible options for reducing services. “We should also look at where we are going to be picking up those planned savings,” he said. The board’s chief executive, Mr R. I. Parker, said he believed board finances were still satisfactory. November was traditionally a heavy-spending month, unlike the rest of the financial year. All board services would

still have to be reviewed. The population of the board’s area was growing but at a slower rate than North Island centres, which meant it faced a real reduction in funds under the population-based Government formula, he said. Professor D. W. Beaven said the board was the meat in the sandwich between the Government and the people. “I think we have got to come out and say we can no longer be expected to carry on the illusion that services are not rationed,” he said. The board should look at the overlap between its services and those available under private health insurance. Professor Beaven also criticised the Government population-based funding system which he described as a device to transfer funds into areas which have more votes.