POWER OF VETO

Evening Post, Volume CII, Issue 149, 21 December 1921, Page 11

POWER OF VETO

HOSPITAL APPOINTMENTS

CHAIRMAN'S STRONG PROTEST.

The proposal to confer on the Minister the power df veto in negard to hospital ' appointments was strongly criticisedi by Mr. F. Castle, chairman, at the meeting of the Wellington Hospital Board this afternoon.

"The Hospitals and Charitable Insti-' tutions Bill recently placed before Parliament," said MftV Castle, "contains one very objectionable provision, which, should, in my opinion, be strenuously opposed by this boaa-d., for it will, if! passed, give the Minister of Hospitals extended power to veto certain actions of hospital boards. This provision is contained in section 2 of the Bill, and is -us follows :—'A board shall not appoint any medical officer (including an honorary medical officer), or a matron., master, manager, house-steward, or engineer, of an institution under-the principal Act, or a secretary to tlie board) without first obtaining the. approval of the Minister to such appointment.' If this- seotion passes it will repeal the following section of the principal Act: —'No appointment of any medical.officer (other tliau an honorary medical 'officer), a master, mana-gei", or matron of .any institution shall be made until the expiration of 21 days after the Minister has been notified of tne intention to make such appointment unless the Minister has previously: approved of sucb appointment.' "It will be seen that the present law gives the Department adequate power and opportunity to place before board® any information, .relating to persons selected' for these positions, for, in addi- | tion to the above, section 75 gives tha Director-General of Hospitals power to call special meetings of boards shquldi lie think necessary. Under these conditions the final decision is rightly left to the boards, a responsibility which they should always retain. It is now proposed to.. abandon this reasonable and proper method in ord«r to gira the Minister the final power of deciding! the fitness- or otherwise of applicants selected for certain appointments to the hospital service. In, the future, if the Department has special information regarding the merits or'; character of these persons, apparently it,-will not divulge it to the hospital boards concerned, for they are not. considered competent to j make a final decision under these circumstances So we are faced with the amazing teituation that hospital boards elected by the taxpayers to administer and control the hospital service in their, districts, and forming an important part of1 the local government aystem of this country, ara. deemed incapable of finally' deciding on evidence placed before thsm what' persons, shall or shall not bo appointed as their principal officers to carry out the work. - "The reasons advanced" for this proposed subordination of hospital boards ■are : («) Some board's have made mistakes in the past; and (b) it is right in principle, seeing that the Government pays 50 per cent, of the salaries. No doubt hospital boards, like other local bodies and higher authorities, have made some mistakes in the past in the conduct, of their affairs, and will continue to do so, but is there any reason to suppose that1 the Minister of the Department will be infallible in this matter?

"Those engaged in administrative work should cany the responsibility for their mistakes, fqr it, will not. improve hospital boards '-.to htvve . this trans-: ferred to another authority. From what is taking place we shall bo quite justified in thinking that the real objective is to make hospital boards' ineffective, andi thus undermine this form of local government, in prder to transfer the administration to the Department. With, regard to ; the.,'coritenfcipn that it,.is,.righ-ti in principle''seeing that the' Government pays 50 per cent, of the salaries, littlo need bo said. Government does not pay 50 pel' cent, of the salaries. It pays approximately 40 per cent, tho balance being paid- out of; revenue derived from, the local bodies, pationts' feas, rents, and other sources. As the local'bodies also pay nearly as much of the salaries, of the staff as the Government (in Wellington district they pay more), shoiild they not also have some say in the appointment of the principal offioersi of the hospital boards? \

"The proposal to g&re the Minister more powers of veto t'ns not brought; before the last conference of hospital boards, nor does it appear to have" been considered by the Hospital Commission. I suppose it has emanated' from tha Hospital Department, but, whatever tho origin, I feel certain it will be viewed with indignation and distrust by the majority of the hospital boards in New Zealand, not because it indicates that the boards are unfit to bo entrusted witH full responsibility in these matters, but because it is not likely to improve matters in the slightest, and because ib will tend to undermine the existing,local governing system under which our" hospital system is controlled, and bring about a reversion to the, centrWisedi ■bureaucratic form of control, which Parliament abandoned many years ago on ■account of Us unsatisfactory results."