HOSPITAL MANAGEMENT

Dunstan Times, Issue 3129, 7 August 1922, Page 4

HOSPITAL MANAGEMENT

To the Editor. Sir—Most ratepayers will agree with Mr Jas. Ritchie’s motion at last week s meeting of the Vincent Hospital Board—" That the present system of hospital management by committee bo discontinued, etc.’’ * It certainly seems high time that the Board took up the responsibilities which were put upon them by their election some years ago. In moving that motion, however, it seems to have been hardly necessary .for Mr Ritchie to have thrown such a gratuitous insult to the as he appears to have done. Judging from your report of the meeting the members of the two Hospital Committees are mainly responsible for the increased annual cost of maintenance. Probably some of your readers are not aware of the fact that the require* ments of both Committees for the year have annually to be passed by the Board befoie the money for their expenditure is voted. I have had close on 20 years connection with hospital management, both as a paid servant and also as a member of the Dunstan Hospital Committee, and I have no hesitation in affirming that the Board is mainly responsible for the present unsatisfactory financial position. The apathy shown by members ot the Board towards hospital management, and particularly so in the case of the Dunstan Hospital, has not tended to instil much enthusiasm into either the local committee or the staff at the Institution. it would be interesting to know how many attendances of members of the Board have been made at the meetings of the Duustan Hospital Committee during the past seven or eight years. Apart from the increased cost of living through the war, most of the increases in the expenditure have emanated from the Board. The Dunstan Hospital Committee never advocated the erection of residences at a time when everything cost about 300 per cent above normal. Neither it suggest several increases in salaries to the staff, though in some instances, and particularly so in regard to nurse s salaries, It was certainly sympathetic. The factors mentioned are largely responsible for the increased cost of maintenance, but the crux of the whole position always did, and always will, lie in careful internal manage* ment. Unfortunately medical practitioners and certificated nurses are not alwavs the most economical of managers.' Though the proposed motion was not carried at the meeting it will certainly have the effect of reducing to some extent the number of people running the Board. I am, etc., S. A. Stevens, C iyto, August