HOSPITAL PLAN

Evening Post, Volume CXXV, Issue 71, 25 March 1938, Page 12

HOSPITAL PLAN

COMMISSION TO SIT

MINISTER TAKES ACTION

BOARD'S DISCUSSION

Notification of his intention to •- set' up a Commission to investigate the Wellington Hospital Board's building proposals was received by the board la?t night from the Minister of Health (the '-'-'Hon.' P. Fraser), who informed the board that at an early date he hoped to be in a position to announce the personnel ot the Commission, and the date on which it •would start. , The letter, was considered in conjunction with the following notice of motion moved by Mr.F. Castle, and considerable discussion followed, the outcome being that the board decided to take no action in the meantime, in view of the Minister's intention: "That a special committee consisting of all members of "the board, be appointed to consider the. following matters and report to the board within Werity-one days after date of meeting: ' • i. Whether or not the board's present building plans ' and ' proposals should be abandoned and some or all of the following proposals be adopted. 2. That immediate • instructions be given to the board's architects to prepare plans and specifications for: (a) a general hospital at Lower Hutt to accommodate 200 patient beds for children arid adults, and also a nurses' home of suitable size; (b) a maternity hospital to supply the needs of. the Hutt Valley. • ' ■ ■ :; , ■ 3. That the present main hospital buildings, including wards 1 to 7, be maintained and used for patients for at least fifteen years, and that -additions and renovations to this block be made in accordance with this condition. 4. That a multi-storeyed block for 150 to 200 medical cases be erected on the land now occupied by ;"Seddon shelters" and the "tin shed." 5. That additional accommodation for nurses and extensions of' steam and other services be limited to supply to a maximum of 700 beds instead of 1000 patient beds as now proposed. In moving the. motion,. Mr; Castle said that for three years they had been discussing building plans, and had not reached finality.' And no Commission would reach finality for them. It was the board's responsibility to take the initiative in settling the difficulties that confronted it—not to ask any Minister or Department to usurp the board's functions. - It was a confession of weakness, and he was not prepared to make it. It was possible for'the board to handle things and reach unanimity by d6ing as he suggested. "I thought it would be much better to try and settle some of our differences in committee instead of trying to push forward proposals that are not acceptable to a large number of members of the-board," said Mr. Castle, "Nearly half the members are opposed to them, and nearly all the contributing bodies are,opposed to them. Why set up a Commission to settle the scheme? Is it in a better position to determine the issue than we are? I submit that there will be a longer delay than is necessary before we get the report of the Commission, and when we do get it the responsibility will still be ours." Mr. Castle proceeded tb discuss the building plans, but the chairman (Mr. •J. Glover) ruled him out of order, as trespassing ov-ev -the -limits of the motion. ■ «.■•'• : Mr. J. W. Andrews moved that the chairman's ruling be disagreed with. This was seconded by Mr. C. A. L. Treadwell, but was lost on a division. NOT SATISFIED. * - In seconding the motion, Mr- Treadwell said that by. carrying it, it would mean they were, not satisfied with the determination in regard to the. £800,000 scheme. There was no objection to a board reversing its previous decision. "We say that a' further" investigation should be made," he said. "It is our duty, for the purpose of assisting the Minister of Health to carry, out this investigation. We are in a position to bring down an authoritative.report to enable the Commission about to be set up to come to a proper decision. We owe that duty to.the Minister, and to the people, and to prevent any waste of time. We have.no right to proceed with the scheme, until the investigation that we believe is necessary, and the Minister believes necessary, is carried out." . '.....' Mr. A. W. Croskery said they had had the matter up before the board three or four times. The board had decided what should be done. , "What a lot of mugs we would be to turn round now, when we have got a .Commission to hear evidence whether the scheme is sound or not, to consider another scheme," he said. "Why, the very, first thing they would say would be that we did not know what, we •wanted." . . The chairman: That is the intention. .Mr. Croskery: Of course it is the intention. There is time enough when we get the report of the Commission. It is useless for the board ( to go any further now that we have set the scheme before the Minister, and he has decided that before he agrees to it he will get the opinion of a Commission." ■ AMENDMENT MOVED. Mr. Croskery moved as an amendment, "That in view of.the fact that the Minister has stated that he .is going to set up a Commission to go into the board's scheme for rebuilding of the hospital, no action be taken in the meantime." , This was seconded by Mrs. M. Semple. Speaking in support of the motion, Mr. J. Purvis said they were all agreed about the need for more accommodation. Where they differed was in the plan to be adopted. "I am very strongly of the opinion, and there is no doubt that a large number of people think the same, that the plan proposed is far too costly for this small community. It will be an unfair burden on the local bodies. ( I don't think the scheme makes the right kind.of provision for the future needs of the city,' and more especially the outlying districts of the Hutt Valley and Hutt County, which extend over forty miles from this hospital." Mr. Castle asked whether Mr. Croskery meant that they should stay out of action while the Minister settled the problem. Was that democratic? Mr. R. Holland said that for 18 months they had ' given way to a minority who had held up the scheme. The plans had been ready to go ahead with' certain parts of the . building. Now the minority was trying to put obstacles in the way of the Commission coming to a decision. The board had to stand by its previous decision, i

Mr. Andrews said that 75 per cent, of the contributors were opposed to the proposals. The scheme was beyond what was a fair thing.

Mr. Holland: You are not an authority. ! Mr. Andrews: I know I'm not, but the weight of medical opinion and architectural opinion is against the scheme. Mr. A. H. Carman .said that the