FRIENDLY SOCIETIES.

Evening Post, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 134, 3 December 1909, Page 4

FRIENDLY SOCIETIES.

TEEATMENT OF MEMBERS OF HOSPITALS. LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS., BRITISH MEDICAL ASSOCIATION IN PROTEST. An interesting discussion took place on clause 72 of the Hospitals Bill in the Legislative Council last night. The clause in question gives boards power to make agreements for special terms as to maintenance in hospitals of members of friendly societies. ) The Hon. Dr. Collins considered this clause was quite out of keeping with the spirit of the Bill. He held that the hospitals were for the treatment of the poor and needy, and at present the friendly society members were attended to by special arrangement with doctors in private practice. The result might be that undue use would be made of the hospitals by friendly society members. It seemed to him that this was legislating for a particular section of the community. It seemed hardly fair to the medical men who served the friendly societies, N nor was it fair to the doctors who gave their services free on the honorary staff. The Wellington division of the British Medical Association held a meeting that afternoon, and decided to enter their strong protest against the clause. At this stage the supper adjournment was taken, and when the Council resumed, the Attorney-General * announced that he was prepared to amend the clause by making agreements between friendly societies and hospital boards subject to approval by the' Minister. There might be a danger that a whole hospital would be employed attending to members of a friendly society. Under the circumstances it would probably be well to give the Minister an over-riding power. It was possible, however, that an agreement might only apply to wives of friendly society members or to children. Mr. Beehan ± Or accidents or irtiectious diseases. Dr. Findlay went on to say that he thought the compromise he had suggested was a fair one. The Hon. Dr. Collins said he felt rather diffident about accepting the compromise. He was only one of a large body of men who were interested. The medical men in Wellington were the only section who knew of the existence of the clause. He read the resolution passed, objecting to the clause, and urging that it should be struct out of the Bill. It was a fact that there were members of friendly societies Nvho were not poor. He urged that consideration of the clause should be postponed. Dr. Findlay said that if this were done he was afraid it would endanger the Bill. The compromise which he had suggested would provide against 1 abuse. He was loth to point out that i in his remarks Dr. Collins Had merely emphasised a contest between friendly societies and medical men. It was a matter which would not appeal to the country, and if members of friendly societies could be properly admitted to a hospital under arrangement what objection was there? Tlie Hon. Sir George M'Lean suggested that the influence of friendly societies was so great -that they might be able to elect a board which would suit themselves. It was all very well to say the Bill would be endangered by postponing the clause. There was such a thing as a compromise. The Hon. W~. Beehan said that under present conditions a member of a friendly society going to a hospital did not pay, and the friendly* societies wanted to pay the hospital authorities, and had no desire io escape liability. The Hon. J. £. Jenkinson said the suggestion made by the Attorney-Gen-eral would place the Minister in a very unenviable position. In his opinion, it would be better to fix a minimum at which friendly society patients could be treated. He disapproved of the principle of according special treatment for a special section of the community. He urged that the clause should be postponed, and a conference could be held. The Hon. J. T. Paul thought it might be found that there was provision in the Bill quite the opposite to a tax on Hospital Boards. Many members of friendly societies were very poor, and did not pay when they went to a hospitals at present. Under the clause they would be paid for by the' friend'y society. The clause provided for an agreement of five years — longer than the life of a board. This was wrong. The Attorney-General agreed to postpone the clause, and suggested that the Hons. C. M. Luke, W. Beehan, and Dr. Collinn should confer, and suggest a working compromise to-morrow,

Mr. Beehan : I would not agree to meet Sir. ' Luke or Dr. Collins. I might as well go direct to ithe British Medical Association. They have done us too much' harm already. Dr. Findlay : Very well ; no doubt we can got someone else to represent the friendly societies.