NOTHING SEEN TO FIGHT ABOUT

Dominion, Volume 35, Issue 7, 3 October 1941, Page 8

NOTHING SEEN TO FIGHT ABOUT

Prime Minister’s View AMENDMENTS TO BILL A claim that in view of the amendments introduced to the Social Security Amendment Bill, the doctors had no case remaining, was made by the Prime Minister, Mr. Fraser. He spoke at length, and held that the policy of the Allied democratic nations today, as expressed in recent declarations, was the policy that the Labour^ Party carried to the electors in 1935 and 1938. “I do not thins that the medical profession as a whole wants to continue a fight when there is nothing to fight about,” Mr. Fraser said. Mr. Fraser discounted suggestions that the Government, by its legislation, was bringing national Socialism to New Zealand. He said it was only by the State acting in the interests of the majority that freedom could be won and retained. The Government must go on to stage after stage of increasing the Opportunities for health, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for alb the people. This was the guiding principle of the Government, which had put into operation a greater proportion of its promises than any other Government he could remember. ••Later on we can enumerate them in many places and to many people throughout the country,” Mr. Fraser said. He added that he had no quarrel with the doctors, nor could he forget the good work they were doing overseas. “If I thought that there was an injustice being done to them or any of the others who are on active service I certainly would not be a party to it,” he said.

Mr. Fraser referred to protest meetings against the Bill and said that if anyone imagined that the Government would be over-awed by the demonstrations in Auckland and Wellington they were making a mighty mistake. Apart from medical men who expressed their views the speakers were obviously party politicians, some aspiring candidates and some perspiring candidates, who would have an opportunity to perspire more after the election, if it came or when it came. If the Government set out to organize mass meetings of those interested in a free medical scheme not 2000 but 50,000 people would attend and a public domain would be required. The case put up by the medical profession quietly and forcefully could not be ignored by the Government.

“I invite the medical profession to think out a better scheme instead of this legislation,” Mr. Fraser said, after stating that he did not think the capitation system the best that could be devised. “Nobody can claim for a moment that the practitioner system in itself is going to do all we want to do. Am 1 right in concluding that the House, however, is unanimous in supporting a free medical service for the people?” The Leader Of the Opposition: Mr. Holland: It would take some time to answer that. (Laughter from Government benches.) This Bill does not give a complete service by any means. Mr. Fraser persisted with his question, and Mr. Holland said that there was nothing free about the service. Somebody had to pay for it, but they were all in favour of a better service. The amendments were there because they provided a way out of an impasse, said Mr. Fraser. When the profession could not accept the original Bill, there were two courses. To endeavour to find some way to give the service to the people or to fig In. “Personally I was not particularly enamoured of having one fight in the Middle East and Europe and another in our own country,” said Mr. Fraser. “If the medical profession decided that they would not operate tlie Act, the Government could have taken many steps. It could have made it illegal for them not to operate the Act; it could have struck their names off the register; it could have declared the B.M.A. an illegal organization. But how far would it have got in the end? And there would have been no medical service for the people, only chaos. It was not one Minister, one section of Cabinet, but tlie whole Cabinet and caucus that decided unanimously that what was wanted was to get the service for tlie people with the least friction and the maximum co-operation. I That is the reason for the amendments before the House.”