“RUNNING AWAY”

Greymouth Evening Star, 6 August 1946, Page 4

“RUNNING AWAY”

GOVERNMENT MEMBERS ACCUSED HOSPITAL RATING ISSUE P.A.) WELLINGTON, Aug. 5. The accusation that Government members • were running away . from the Local Government Committee’s recommendations on hospital rating was made by the Opposition in the House of Representatives to-day. This subject again dominated discussion ox the report of the committee for the third day. Mr W. S. Goosman (Oppn,. Waikato) said that although most of the recommendations of the committee were unanimous, the Government now said in effect that it did not agree with the findings, although the Government had a majority on the committee. It was rubbish for Government speakers in the debate to say that a decrease in hospital rating would relieve the rich man of rates and increase land values. The Government had not worried because the steep increase in hospital rating had lowered the value of land. Mr Fraser and Mob Rule Mr Goosman said the Government had talked oLstabilisation, but had let hospital rates skyrocket. The Prime Minister, he said, had told a deputation from local bodies that he could not have mob rule, even if local body mob rule. That was a gem from the Prime Minister, during whose term of office there had been more mob rule —to whiqh the Government had given in time and again—than in any other period in the country’s history. . Mr J. Thorn (Govt., Thames) said that when he read the committee’s recommendation to peg the hospital rate he felt much the same reaction as the Prime Minister. He felt resentful because, if social security had to meet the entire cost' of hospital maintenance, the greater part of the burden vjould be placed on the shoulders of wage and salary earners, who contributed the bulk of the social security taxation. If land was derated the immediate effect would be to place large sums of unearned increment in the hands of landowners. If there was a case for pegging the rates it was not that ratepayers could not pay, but that there was a vast discrepancy in the rate they paid for the same service as compared with others. If pegging the rate were to be adopted it should be done on a uniform basis as suggested by the Minister of Health. “Everybody Should Pay” Mr H. Johnstone (Oppn., Raglan) said that, as hospital services were available to all, everybody should pay for them according to their individual ability. The effect of big increases in hospital rating was such that important works had to be deferred. Hospital rates did not bear so much against the commercial sections of the community, which were able to pass on the cost. It was the small householder and the farmer who could not do so. Mr P. G. Connolly (Govt., Dunedin West) said it had been asked why the man who owned his house should have to pay a hospital rate. The reason was that a hospital was a community service and added to the value of his property. All persons who lived in houses, whether they owned or rented them, paid rates. He considered that a uniform rate over the whole Dominion was the most satisfactory solution of the problem. Mr W. J. Polson (Oppn., Stratford): How would you get over the difference in standards of valuation? Mr Connolly: It would have to be done on the capital value system. No Party Feeling Mr D. W. Coleman (Govt., Gisborne) said that no one was refused a hearing by the committee, which was at first viewed with suspicion, but later with confidence. No party feeling had been displayed by members of the committee. The report did not recommend that the permanent commission on local body affairs should be set up as a law-making body, and if it did not function satisfactorily it could be abolished. The commission was imperative if the affairs of local bodies were to be administered scientifically. Mi' Coleman said he was convinced that something should be done in connection with hospital rating as it affected local bodies and, replying to an Opposition interjector, said he did not see how anything could be done this year. It was not a matter which could be done by a stroke of the pen. The object of the committee’s hospital rating recommendation was to stabilise the rate struck, not to stabilise the levy. The committee was not in favour of abolishing the rate, nor was that advocated by the associations which gave evidence before the committee. Local bodies generally, he said, were not so much concerned with .what years were taken as a basis to stabilise the rate, but they were concerned with the stabilisation of that rate. The hospital rate had been increasing long before the advent of social security, and it was a fact that the first year social security operated the rate showed a decrease. “Only One Fair Road” Mr A. S. Sutherland (Oppn., Hauraki) said one weakness arising from the report was that although the reccmmendations were said to be unanimous, Government members in the House were “running away” from the question of hospital rating. There was only one fair road for the Government to follow, and that was to implement the recommendations of the committee. If that was not done the Government was looking for trouble. Mr J. Acland (Oppn., Temuka) said his suggestion was that the average cost for each occupied bed for the 1935-39 period should be taken as a base, and that the average increase in costs should be calculated, and the percentage of the increase arrived at. Then each board would receive that percentage increase in its subsdy 'from the Consolidated Fund. Efficient boards would benefit, and the rate in the districts of extravagant boards would rise slightly. Whatever was done, whether in accord with the committee’s recommendation, the proposal of the Minister of Health, or his suggestion, a fundamental change would be made that should be thoroughly examined. He was concerned lest any change should lead to the nationalisation of hospitals and the loss of local control.