HOSPITAL TREATMENT

Evening Post, Volume C, Issue 36, 11 August 1920, Page 11

HOSPITAL TREATMENT

PUBLIC OR PRIVATE?

There was a brief discussion in the House of Representatives ye6terday on the merits of private and public hospitals, and the'national and existing systems. It took place when an amendment of the Hospital and Charitable Institutions Act was introduced by a message ■ from the Administrator. The Acting-Leader of the Opposition (Mi\ T. M. Wilford) asked if -this was intended to deal with th© hospital subsidies. The Prime Minister replied that it was not. It was really a. sraall Bill to deal with the hospital trouble in South Otago. Mr. M'Combs (Lyttelton) urged that the hospital system should be placed on a national basis, so that the expenditure should be more equitably clistribuied than at present, when a great portion of it was met out of rates collected on a flat basis of assessment instead of on a graduated basis. The Minister for Public Health (Hon. C. J. Parr) said that there was a great deal of force in the plea for a national system, but to cany it out the Government would have to find half a million moro than at present. This the Government did not feel disposed to do this session, having in mind the great demands made for expenditure in other direction*. The system had not been attempted in any other country. He would like to be the first to attempt it in New Zealand, but ir was impossible at present. Ho intended this session to introdu2e a new schedule of hospital subsidies providing for a fairer and more equitable basi6, giving the money where it was most needed. Mr. Atmore (Nelson) advocated a national system of hospitals. He did not know that the cost would be any greater to the working man if the extra charges had to bo met by the Government than if he had to pay directly in the way of fees. They would then make the hospitals thoroughly efficient so that there would not be the need for all the private hospitals, which, wore more efficient than the State institutions. (Members: "No. ') Mr. Atmore asked why, if the better servico was not given in the private institutions, were they patronised by all the people who could afford it, including leading members of the Government. Mr. Parr defended the public hospitals, which, he taid, were much, better equipped to every way than the private institutions, and had the best nursing service in the world. The advantage of the private hospital was that the p»,tient could have Ms own surgeon. If the facts wera as Mr. Atmore stated, how was it that there was a widespread deE.and that they should establish special wards where people who were able, to pay should receive the advantage of the hospi+al with the service of their own medical advisers? Mr. Ataiore had suggested that the treatment should be free as well as nationalised^ That, also, was an excellent idea, but, they should go warily after the war in advocating reforms. At present anyone was able to obtain treatment at tho hospitals, whether able to pay the fees or not, and leally it could not be said that 25s or 30s a week was adequate payment for the services renderedIn .reply to Mr. Sidey, the Minister said that he wou.'d refer the Bill to the Public Health Committee.