HOSPITAL DISTRICTS

Evening Star, Issue 14214, 13 November 1909, Page 11

HOSPITAL DISTRICTS

NEW POLICY PROPOSED. DECREASED EXPENDITURE, INCREASED SUBSIDY [I'ROM Oun P.\BI.IAMKN'TAitv Rnt’oim:n.] ( WELLINGTON', November 13. " If a district is careful and economical iu its administration it gets an increase in Ihc rate of .subsidy from tho Government.” T his, according to the Hon. (1. Fowlds, is the fundamental principle of The new schedule of the Hospitals and Charitable Institutions Bill prepared for the consideration of membets ac a jitter_ stage. The new proposals are contained in a scries of schedules, anil tho Minister was asked by your correspondent for his explanation. " As 1 explained to the House in introducing the Bill, lie said, “there are very wide differences in the rates levied in the several hospital and charitable aid districts, coming down as low a? 5s dci on a propel ty valued at £I,OOO. and rising to several (Htunds on a property of Hmilar value. There are only a very few that, pay over £l. ' hut there are a considerable number that pay from 5s to 15s and 18s, and in some cases yon get the big difference in the rate on adjoining properties which are accidentally situated in different hospital dish rets. That very often occurs because one district makes no provision for its old people. Take the Wellington and Palmerston North districts as a case in point. Them is no 01,1 Men’s Homo iu the Palmerston North dritrivt. but Home in the Palmerston North district, but what I have been sttiving after iu to contrive some method of subsidy or contribution that would relieve the burden from tho poorer and most heavily-taxed districts. “There are.” continued Mr Fowlds. “two diffluent methods proposed. The first varies the subsidy in proportion as the rateable vain:.’ of the district decreases per head of (he population, and the subsidy also increases in proportion as tho amount levied in the district increases. The second alternative in the schedule is wotded on a different basis, but to my mind it meets the difficulty belter, although it does not raise the subsidy correspondingly with the increase of rate levied in the district. In the first schedule the rate levied is to rise faster than the rate at which the subsidy increases, and that is the only limitation that is put upon extravagant administration in the districts. In the third schedule we reduce the rate of subsidy as the expenditure per head of population rases in the district, because the increased rale of expenditure is some indication of extravagant administration. Tlic position undvr the thiid schedule is that the district with the lowest rateable value per head of population and the lowest rate of levy per head of the population gets the highest subsidy, and the subsidy decreases as the rateable value per head of the population incicisre. "Me have.’ he went on to say, “wotked out very carefully tho < ItVcts of cadi of these proposals :ji tire ddl'-. rent district', and we find that 1: scry neatly confirms our own estimate of what would be inquired tmrii the different districts. Toe scheme docs not involve any alteration in the hospital districts, hut it minimises the evil of further subdivision of districts, because a wealthy district cutting olf trout a poor district would bring abon: a reduction of the subsidy to its own district. M The idea involved in the proposals.” added Mr Fowlds, “is that if a .district is careful and economical in its administration it will get an inet eased subs id v. If a. district is poor, a- shown by tlic low rateable value per head of the population, the subsidy is increased accordingly. This, of course, means that the s'l'nH iy payable on the rates collected over tho waoie 1).,, minion wiil no: he reduced, but it varies the apportionment a,wording to tho need> and deserts of the various district?. These proposals are now hefere the Select Committee appointed to consider them.’’ COMMITTEE STAOE. The Hospital and Charitable Institutions Till was further discussed in committee. The Minister trire Hon. Oco. Fowld.s) asked that clause c/J Oul-s'di. s to hoard.', in respect of money; ui-.xdi should be poffi--1 ained until all the other , lauses had been passed. This was .agreed to. Clauses 40 and 4i were passed without amendment. On clause 42 (conei-iing of no less titan twelve subclauscs. and providing for contributions by local authorities towards the expenditure of hoards) Mr Alavev pointed out that, suliclnttse 10 of clause" 42 gave tho Minister of Finance power fo "send money to any contributory local authority." Ibis was at variance with the catdi'na! provision ot the Slate-guaranteed Advances Bill (i.e., Government loann io local bodies to cease).- -Mr Founds replied that In.’ recognised tho clause would require alteration later on. He had taken a. note of the matter.—Mr Massey thought Hud it the Committee wote lo go on in" this wav serious trouble might a lire.—Mr Fowlds further explained that this Bill had been printed before tne Slate-guaranteed Advances Bill had been drafted.—.Mr T. E. Taylor pretested vigorously against this method of doing business. There was nothing in the Bill showing which parts of it weie new and which were mctciy consolidations. Quite recently a commission had been set up outside Parliament to consolidate the law of the country, it ml tciiott.s complaint,a had been made about the value of that work. The Bill, he said, Humid be taken back and put into proper torn,. [ u i; s present shape it was t-imply putting a premium on mistakes, li was a reflection on members of the House. “I repeat," he said, “that it should be taken Inn k "—The Minister said the Bill would have to be proceeded with. U was out of the question to suggest that, this Bill should bo adered to conform with a clatree in a measure which might not be parsed. Whan the Bill before the House passed and the Kta-le-guaraiueed Advances Bill was under consideration, the necessary provision could he made bn- pi meeting the clause under notice. If it was not na.-s«|, and lire .State-guaranteed Advances Bill did tint find its way on to the Statute Book, then: would be no power given to these local atil. to borrow monev. He claimed that the course he proposed to follow was in accord with parliamentary practice. Any necessary amendment could he made later by Governor’s Message in the usual (ll ' anhicre tiou 10 nf clause m, .Mr \V. FI, Hcn-jcs urged that it would bo very cumbersome to allow local contributing authorities to borrow rnoirev in certain cireitm.-tuntes. He contended’ that it would he much better it all the hoi rowing was done by the boatfls. The Minister replied that a reasonable amount ot e!asticity between the two svstems as provided m the Bill was very ’ desirable/ and it would be morn economical and convenient —Tho clause was agreed to. Clause 47, at the Minister’s desire, was amended so as to provide that where there .s no contributory local authority tho Government may appoint, three members as representatives of that pari of the district'. -Mr Retries pointed out (in reply to a suggestion by Air Duncan that the' words “may^appoint” be altered to “.shall appoint") that it would he pos/sible for the Governor to appoint three members to tho Auckland Hospital Board as representatives of the Great Barrier Island or some other district not under control of a contributory iocal authority.—A proposal to amend tire clause as suggested hv Mr Duncan was negatived. Bomo discussion followed a proposal bv Air AVI tty that clause 49 should be amended so that pending investment moneys belonging to boards may bo paid not only into banks, but to local authorities authorised by statute to negotiate investments.—Air T. E. Tavlor supported the amendment, and caid" that hospital boards should not be compelled to play into tho hands of the banking monopoly, but should be free to invest moneys to tho best advantage.—Other members spoke to the amendment.—Air Dillon contended that it was a waste of time to pursue such a discussion. The debate, he said, tickled him immensely, since few hospital boards had surplus moneys for investment purposes.—The amendment was defeated by 42 votes to 23. Sir William Steward moved an amend-

ment to clause 52 to the effect that tho proviso bo struck out which made it compulsory for the. Minister’s consent to be obtained before tiny grant could be accepted in trust for the establishment of any new institution.—Air Bussell complained that in tho matter of charitable aid administration private philanthropy hud largely censed to exist, and that a race of paupers was growing up. He knew, in fact, of a third generation of paupers in New Zealand, and there was a growing army of professional paupers in this country.—Tho Minister accepted the amendment, and the words were struck out. An amendment to clause 58 was proposed by Mr Luke to tho effeet that when a board desired to borrow on security for building or other purposes it may do so by way of special loan under the Loans to Load Bodies Act. —Tho proposal was defeated by 57 votes, to 26. Sir Win. Steward moved to add to clause 53 provision whereby boards should lie empowered to borrow by way of bank overdraft to the extent of unpaid contributions and unpaid subsidy.—The Aliuisto.r said there was no need for tho amendment, as it was already possible to got from the Alinister of Finance an advance of subsiily on contributions due. and there was one board in New Zealand that had received an advance of £6,C00 in this way. —The amendment was carried bv 52 votes to 22.