AUCKLAND HOSPITAL

Evening Star, Issue 19325, 11 August 1926, Page 12

AUCKLAND HOSPITAL

'OFFICIALS: QUARREL

[Per United Press Association.] AUCKLAND, August 10. 'I he Commission of Inquiry into charges made by responsible officials of the Auckland Hospital Board against each other’s dischaigo of duties Beard evidence to-day. The board’s secretary (Mr H. A. Somerville) and the architect (Mr G. W. Allsop) were principally concerned. Air Johnstone, representing the Hospital Board, said lie did not propose to call any evidence regarding negligence, extravagance, or waste, because no such charges had been properly made. The only buildings in respect of which charges had been raised in the Press were the Wallace wards and the laundry. As to the Wallace wards, only two small matters had been criticised — that there was only one lift and only one operating theatre, Regarding both buildings, the advice of medical and engineering experts had been followed. The board had asked for an inquiry because it had: promised an inquiry of some kind to the architect and the secretary because of a discussion about the delay in the completion of the laundry and the alleged error hy the hoard’s officers. • Nothing has been raised in’ dispute regarding the management of the hospital or the infirmary, or of the board’s relations with tho nursing staffs.

The Commissioner: I quite agree. I don’t intend to inquire into matters such ns that, hut to consider the complaints hv the local bodies as to the increase In the board’s levies. Mr Johnstone proceeded to review the hospital’s expenditure at length. Mr William Wallace, chairman of tho Auckland Hospital Board, gave lengthy evidence concerning the board’s ing programme since 1017. Witness declared there was no friction between tho board and tho staff, ’the only friction that existed was on the advisory staff, involving the architect, the engineer, and tho secretary. In reply to Mr Northcroft. witness agreed that Allsop had always been willing and anxious to take part in any consultation between him and the staff. No suggestion had been made to him that Allsop had not taken part in conferences as freely as lie might. With the exception of the engineer and the sec•’rotary, no knew of no member of the staff with whom Allsop was not on the most cordial terms. Witness knew that Allsop had made an extended tour abroad to investigate hospital construction, including hospital Icndries. I run his knowledge of the information Allsop had obtained, witness at anv rate regarded him ns an expert and as an economical designer. _ Me would not have retained Allsop if he did not hold that opinion. Mr Northcroft: The tables yon have put in show tho estimates have rarely been exceeded. Witne-w; Very rarely. Mr Northcroft: hm (hat the criticism that he is vosnonsihlo for the extras D one that in your opinion is not justified? Witness: That is right. Mr Northcroft: 1 understand the hoard instructed that the equipment to he installed in the laundry should he arranged hy the architect and engineer? Witness: They were to work in enni"'icfion. Both know of that decision of the board. Asked about the installation of only one lift in the Wallace wards, which had been the siddect of criticism, Mr Wallace stated that at tho time it was considered quite adequate, lie was told the lift was capable of carrying 1,500 people in eight hours. In reply to Air Meredith (counsel for H. A. Somerville (secretary of the hoard), witness said there had been a dispute between the architect and the board’s quantity surveyor (Mr Stewart), and the matter had been dealt with hy the board. Mr Meredith ; Have yon ever had the economy of Allsop’s works criticised? Witness: Only when the Health Department referred to tho cost of renovations to the infirmary. Air Meredith read a letter from tba Health Department in which it was stated the cost of all the buildings recently erected by the board had been in excess of the cost of similar buildings erected in other centres. Air Wallace: The Director-General of Health never brought anything to support that statement. Afr Meredith: The Minister turned down a proposal to build a nurses’ homo at a cost of £!)6,00U on the ground that a cost of £553 a bed was excessive? Air Northcroft: But that was a time of war prices. Air Meredith: Quite so; two years later a home was built at a cost of a little over £3OO a bed. Mr Wallace; But the plans were altered and forty-seven more beds were provided. Counsel also read a complaint from the department as to the excessive cost of the boiler house. “Do you still wish to say that ■ Allsop’s economy has not been questioned?” he asked. “There are three pretty good letters.” Mr Wallace: Allsop is regarded as the best hospital architect in the dominion. Who was the export who advised the department regarding the cost? Mr Meredith: But they are three good comments, and slightly better ilian comments in support of Ids work made at a Notary Club lunch. Ro-exam’ined by Air Johnstone, Mr "N, - >r-e .said tho Director-General of Health had not been able to make any ptfiv't'pe comparison between the costs of building in Auckland and in other centres. The inquiry will bo continued tomorrow.