HOSPITAL ACCOUNTS

Dominion, Volume 27, Issue 71, 16 December 1933, Page 20

HOSPITAL ACCOUNTS

Dannevirke Board’s Move

AN OFFER REFUSED Dominion Special Service. Masterton, December 15. Trouble which has existed between the Wairarapa and Dannevirke hospital boards for some time past over the payment of fees for patients entering the Dannevirke Hospital from the Wairarapa board’s district, was again under discussion at the bi-monthly meeting of the Wairarapa board to-day. At the last meeting ,of the board it was decided to advise the Dannevirke board that so far as subsequent accounts were concerned the Wairarapa board would reciprocally arrange for a period of two years that in those cases where patients were resident in the Wairarapa board’s district and treated in the Dannevirke Hospital the Wairarapa board -.would pay the same proportion of fees as was collected by the Dannevirke board. ' A letter was received at to-day’s meeting from the Dannevirke board stating that it had been unanimously decided not to accept the Wairarapa board’s proposal. “We want to work amically with all boards, but it seems to me that Dannevirke is the one case where we cannot,” observed the chairman, Mr. W. Fisher. He considered they should refuse any liability in cases where patients were removed from the Wairarapa board’s district into the Dannevirke Hospital. After brief comment on the question it was decided to refer the letter back to the Dannevirke board, advising, that the Wairarapa board would not accept any responsibility except in urgent cases. FARMERS DUBIOUS Co-operative Scheme for Relief Workers Masterton, December, 14. In reply to a letter from the Waira; rapa provincial executive of the Farmers Union stating that it was considered the abandoning of the 4B contract Scheme >n favour of a co-operative' scheme would adversely affect both the farmer and the relief' worker, the Commissioner of Unemployment, Mr. G. C. Godfrey, has written stating that no change can be made in the board’s decision. The letter from the Wairarapa executive stated that the contractor acted as an essential person in control, and that in the absence of a contractor, a group of co-operative workers who might come and go had not the necessary backing to provide tools and equipment. The farmer was also left without control or checking of the amount of work done, and was therefore without proper means of assessing progress payments due to workers leaving the job. . ■ The co-operative system was considered cumbersome and unworkable, and the executive was of opinion that its enforcement would make jnore difficult the absorption of unemployed in farming districts (luring the winter. It therefore urged that a contractor be still allowed to engage the requisite number of unemployed men to undertake work under the 4B scheme. , _ Replying to the protest, the Commissioner of Unemployment advised that the Wairarapa district was the only one in which the non-co-operative system had been allowed to operated In all other districts, satisfactory work had been obtained on a co-operative basis.