INFLUENZA

Evening Star, Issue 16995, 18 March 1919, Page 8

INFLUENZA

EPIDEMIC COMMISSION. Before the Influenza Commission at Wellington vesterday, Dr Makg'ill gave additional evidence that influenza was a preventable disease, in that by extreme measures its spread could be stopped. In practice, however, it was known that in no country had it been found posisble to avoid pandemic, even in Australia, where every known measure within the sphere of practical administration was taken. It was true that in New South Wales the recent outbreak had been apparently very promptly checked, but the case was still scarcely parallel with that in New Zealand in October last. It had come upon Australia in the summer, when the people could be induced to live out of doors and the seasonal tendency to pneumonic infections was absent. In New Zealand the weather was exceptionally 'favorable to catarrhal trouble. Australia had her troubles yet to face, including the effects of a winter epidemic. Also the authorities in New South Wales j had the experience of other countries, including New Zealand, to guide them, and, being forewarned, were torearmed. Witness said the present status of the | Health Department was moat unsatisfacI tory. It lacked powers whole powers I were most needed. Sanitary progress ! could only be secured by taking public j health out of the sphere of politics and by

! establishing a continuity of policy, of j which one item should be the education of the public to seek after sanitary righteousness. To this end it would be neces- ! sary to establish a strong controlling body representing various grades of public opinion and seasoned by a liberal admixlur of expert knowledge in the sciences and trades with which sanitary work was most directly concerned. In the Public Health Amendment Act of 1918, clause 2, an attempt had been made to establish such a body by the creation of a Board of Public Health. Unfortunately, this board were merely advisory, the board reporting to the Minister their opinions on public health questions. The board could not direct the enforcement of any sanitary works, and could not initiate any precautions. They could not bring pressure to bear on local bodies, or give directions to departmental officers. Their recommendations went to the Minister, and thus were subject to the political considerations inseparable from Cabinet control. Under the same Act district advisory boards might be constituted by the Minister. Their function was to report on matters which the Minister might refer to them—a variety of sanitary debating club, in fact, to whom subjects for discussion might be allotted, and whose resolutions would be duly pigeon-holed if they ran contrary to popular prejudice or were otherwise inconvenient. Little of value need be expected from the creation of these bodies as at present constituted. After referring to the Act' of 1900, whidh, he said,, ivas passed in a hurry, whan there -was a plague scare. Dr Makjjill said -that - doubtless a Minister of Health was' needed to’ represent the claims of sanitation- to Cabinet and to Parliament. ' The general expenditure must bo thus controlled, as also amendments and additions to sanitary legislation ; but here his functions' should end, and the real controlling body should be non-political. A board of health, composed of persons 'V’th. experience and expert knowledge, whoso actions and decisions were founded on scientific laws and actuated by the practical • needs of the community. To such a board the departmental officers would report and the local authorities would appeal, ami if.« powers should be such that matters such as the passing of

sanitary by-laws'and the' undertaking of sanitary works would be compulsory on its mandate. To this end the decisions of the board should be final, and be modified only on appeal to the Supreme Court. In West Australia and in Queensland these powers are delegated to a Commissioner of Public Health, but probably in New Zealand public opinion would prefer a board such as he had sketched.