SECURITY ACT

Hokitika Guardian, 2 May 1939, Page 6

SECURITY ACT

A DOCTOR'S STATEMENT

(Per Press Association.- —Copyright.)

WELLINGTON, Mfty 2.

“An attempt by the Minister Tor Health (Hon. P. Fraser) to place the responsibility for delay in operation hi the health provisions of the Security Act on the medical profession, cannot deceive - anyone with a Knowledge-/ of the facts,” said Div>J. S, Jamieson, Chairman of the Health Insurance Committee of the New Zealand branch of the British Medical Association, in a statement .to-day... -c “Th 0 Minister,”- he- said, “goes- so far as to say ‘if: the association ,per-J> si&ts. in its present attitude-its. respon- t sibility in delaying, curtailing, or obstructing the Government’s security and heaV-h services, will be .very great, and the odium of even partiaL. prevention of the people enjoying full benefits will inevitably lie associated with the instigators of its policy.’ ’ “Such a statement, emanating from Mr Fraser,” said Dr. Jamieson, “is not what we have been led to expect from him in the past. If Mr Fraser ■> will only examine the position further he will see if there is any-odium to he borne it must be placed entirely upon the shoulders of’the Government. The scheme is the Government’s scheme and not the medical profession’s. ■ “When drawing up that scheme, the-Government completely disregarded the representations' of the New Zealand branch of the B.M.A; on the subject. The measure was enacted according to the Government’s own ; ideas, and the Government thus went over the heads of the medical profession, whose services were necessary to it into effect; The. scheme is thus entirely the Government’s, and if there is any odium to he attached to the failure, to cairy it into effect, that stigma surely must rest with the Government.

“The Government should have first made sure it. would receive the approval and co-operation of the profession concerned, or framed its proposals accordingly. If the Government had considered the scheme recommended by the. Association it would have secured not only the wholehearted approval, but the active co-operation of the profession. Instead, it-produced a scheme which the medical profession conscientiously believed would, in operation, lower the standard of medical practice In New Zealand/ and ■ this being the case the profession would be acting contrary to their sense of public dirty if they attempted to carry it out. In the Act there was provision for medical men contracting in for service under it, this being entirely optional.

“What blame or odium then can he attached to the profession when they actually exercise the right given them by the Government under the Act by not accepting contracts while the Minister seeks to place the blame on the profession for delay or non-fulfilment of the health scheme,” said Dr Jamieson in conclusion. “The truth is that even if the profession were ready and willing to accept it at once the Government could not put it into operation. We are but now at a stage which should have been reached at least a year before the legislation was enacted.”