PUKEORA COSTS

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXXIII, Issue 21980, 26 March 1946, Page 4

PUKEORA COSTS

TREATMENT OF T.B. 10 YEARS’ COMMITMENT levy on contributors A letter from the Pukeora Sanatorium Committee, received at yesterday's meeting: of I lie Cook Hospital Board, indicated that, a decision had been reached to raise the fees to 21s per day for boards outside the group. In addition, it had been decided to impose a levy on contributory boards to bring; in a sum equivalent to 4s per day on the institution beds as compared with Is per day last rear. The Cook Hospital Board's levy for 1916-47 would he £419; and a charge would be made of approximately £94 to adjust last year’s levy. The secretary, Mr. C. A. Harries, reported that last year's levy was about £ll2. The fact that the Cook board was receiving no advantages from being within the group was mentioned by several members of the board, who held that the contributory boards were aclualy paying costs over and above those incurred in the treatment of cases, in order that other boards outside the group should be able to send patients to Pukeora at 21s per day. The Cook Hospital Board had provided its own accommodation for tuberculosis cases, said Mr. S. T. Gray, who added that last month ttiis board sent no patients to Pukeora, and in the previous month had only had one or two patients there. Higher Charges Ruled Out

The chairman, Mr. M. T. Trafford, stated that when the group opened its operation of Pukeora, it had been proposed to charge outside boards more than the contributory bodies. The Health Department had flatly disallowed that proposal, however, although he had pointed out that if outside boards were not to carry an additional rate they would send their _ patients to Pukeora instead of providing their own tuberculosis accommodation.

One point made by the chairman was that if outside boards’ patients were not accommodated at Pukeora sanatorium, the costs to the contributory boards would be higher than at present. In regard to the possibility of the board withdrawing from the Pukeora group, the chairman stated that there was provision for notice to that effect in the original agreement. Several speakers suggested registering a further strong protest against the position which had arisen in respect of treatment at Pukeora, and Mr. H. H. Barker remarked that the principle was wrong that this board should be levied for expense which should certainly fall upon boards which actually used the sanatorium. Actually, he said, this board could bo overborne by others inside the group who were in a position to make more use of the institution. Relations Inside the Group

Mr. Gray said that the department controlled the financial relations between boards in the group and boards outside the group. His protest, however, was against the relations between the boards inside the group. Hawke’s Bay boards had many more patients in the Pukeora home than the Cook board, he said, but it had been pointed out to him that Cook Hospital was fortunate in having a very good tuberculosis officer on ns staff, which condition of affairs might not last. In a few months it might prove that the Cook Hospital would have to send many patients to Pukeora. There was also the point that other boards maintained special facilities for other treatments which did not return the full financial outlay . Mr. H. J, F. Tombleson said the board’s quarrel was with the Health Department, which had refused the contributory boards any benefit from participation in the scheme. Mr. J. H. Hall asked the board not to treat the matter on a parochial basis, and argued that the treatment of tuberculosis should be made a national responsibility with compulsory features. The chairman stated that there had been no promise of preference to contributory boards, though he had fought to secure it. What the board had to remember was that while at present the Cook Hospital had no patients suitable for treatment at Pukeora, it might have some ns a result of the closer canvas now being conducted in the district. Advantages of Outside Boards

“I can’t let a levy of £419 on this board pass without comment, and I am going to move that a special report on our participation in the Pukeora group be brought down by the medical superintendent and the secretary,” said Mr. E. R. Black.

He pointed out that if the Cook board withdrew from the group, it would still have the advantages which outside boards enjoyed under the present system. The Cook Hospital was already providing its own service for tuberculosis patients at considerable expense, and if it found 10 cases which were suitable for admission to Pukeora. beds in

the institution would not be made availL. H. L. Maclean seconded the m He ol said that the board had joined the group under the impression that it would gain substantial benefits; but as it had turned out it was in a worse position than the boards outside the group. Mr. J. B. Williams also supported the motion,’ saying that the board’s position as a contributor to the scheme was slipping from bad to worse. He agreed with Mr. Hall that tuberculosis treatment should be a national responsibility, and argued that as far as Pukeora was concerned the boards were getting further away fom that objectUG State Not Assuring Liability

The chairman explained that he had argued for a national basis at the first meeting of Pukeora group boards, but the Minister had indicated that the Government “would not have it on at any price” The boards had to do it for themselves, and moreover the Health Department had stepped on the proposal to charge outside boards more than contributory boards. He asked the board to remember that if the principle of charging additional to outside boards were adopted generally the board might lose more than it gained, since it was enjoying an advantage in respect of women and children at Otaki. The real question, in his mind, was whether or not they should make every effort to wipe out the scourge of tuberculosis. If the campaign was successful in 20 years the boards might have a lot of expensive buildings and equipment standing idle—and that was the best thing that could happen. It would fall very heavily upon the smaller hospital districts if each were obliged to provide for its own tuberculosis treatment. It was a good principle that the better-situated and stronger boards should help the weaker and less financial boards. Initial Term of 10 Years Mr Black supported Mr. Hall’s argument’ that tuberculosis treatment was a national responsibility. It was questionable whether this board was right in supporting the present scheme, which was actually an institute for a national scheme of tuberculosis facilities. On the question of cost, the Cook board was very little better off as a contributory to the scheme than it would be as a non-contributor. Mr Barker asked whether it was not a fact that the board could not withdraw from the scheme before 1954? The chairman said the board could withdraw on giving 12 months' notice. He did not know what term was obligatory in the first place. The secretary referred to the minutes of the Pukeora meetings, and informed the board that the agreement had been for 10 years and until such time beyond that term as boards were prepared to continue. Mr. Gray opposed the idea of asking tlie executive officers for a report on matters which had been conveyed fully to members in earlier reports. Mr. Black stated that in view of the fact that the board was committed until 1954, in any case, lie would withdraw his motion. . , , The Pukeora committee s letter was received.