Kaitaia Faimers Hostile To High Charges at Wilson Home

Northern Advocate, 16 March 1939, Page 2

Kaitaia Faimers Hostile To High Charges at Wilson Home

fJpHAT LORD NUFFIELD BE WRITTEN TO INFORMING HIM THAT

HIS INTENTION TO PROVIDE A HOME FOR CRIPPLED CHILDREN WAS BEING DEFEATED THROUGH PROHIBITIVE CHARGES WAS A SUGGESTION MADE AT THE ANNUAL MEETING OF THE KAITAIA FARMERS’ UNION.

This was not proceeded with, but it was decided to ask the Government, where parents could not pay, to make the whole cost of treatment at the Wilson Home a charge against -the State.

Although charges at the home had been reduced by 1/- per day, they were still high at 15/-, said the chairman, Mr T. S. Houston, who is also chairman of the Mangonui Hospital Board, which he said had been called upon to find over £2OO for one patient. There were many crippled children in the district, as well as in other districts, who could receive no benefits from the homo owing to the cost.

ft see mod that the purpose of Lord Nuffield was being defeated. Mr Lewis: It appears to me that the home lias been turned Into a rich man’s institution. Mr A. E. Bell: Is the home being used much? The chairman; It is full, and there is a waiting list, but the local hospital board cannot afford to pay £3OO a year for a patient, and very little, if anything, can be paid by parents. Under the Health Scheme the board wiir be allowed 6/- per day for each patient. Mr C. B. Michie: But when that scheme operates we will not be able to collect anything from patients, and quite a lot will be lost in this way. Mr J. C. Marsh said he could not understand how r the 15/- per day was

made up. It was absurd to say that the attendance a patient received would cost so much, and a great deal of the money must go in administration. The actual maintenance of a child should not be more than 5/- per day. “Please Explain.”

Mr Michie: A man was asked if he could contribute something towards the cost bf his child and he wrote to the Minister about it, with the result that the Mangonui Hospital Board received a “please explain” letter. This showed the attitude of the Government.

The hospital board had been assured that the charges at the home were not excessive and, if that was so, responsibility should be a State mat-

ter. Mr A. W. Masters: Steps should be taken to make those using the hospital pay when they .are able to do so. Mr A. Holder asked what percentage of European patients using the local hospital paid. The chairman: Excluding the Maoris, we collected 46 per cent, of the fees which was a great improvement on past years. Speaking of the high charges at the Auckland Hospital for patients from outside, the chairman said the Mangonui board had to pass payment to the Auckland board at its last meeting of £SOO. He urged that the law should be amended so that a person who n had left n district should not be a charge against that district. A patient should be a charge against the district in which he resides at the j time of receiving hospital treatment. | Who Should Pay? j Mr Cowie: A layman cannot say i whether the charge for Wilson Homo I treatment is fair or not. What con- } cerns us is who should pay. Mr Marsh thought the hospital board should write directly to Lord Nuffield pointing out that he was being frustrated in his aims. The chairman: I did bring that before the hospital board, but other members objected. Mr J. Cowie moved that, in view of the high cost of treating crippled children from the country in the Wilson Home, the Government be asked io make the whole cost of treatment a charge against the State in those cases in which the parents of children could not pay. Mr Marsh seconded the motion, which was carried. Write to Lord Nuffield? The motion will go to the subprovincial conference at Ohaeawai as a remit. Mr Marsh moved that the chairman write to Lord Nuffield informing him that his intention to provide a home for crippled children was being defeated by the prohibitive charges and that Lord Nuffield be invited to satisfy himself that this is so by inquiry.

Mr Michie thought it would be injudicious to communicate directly with Lord Nuffield. He had followed the usual procedure in making his gift and should not be drawn into what might be called a domestic quarrel. Mr A. E. Bell; The matter if. a delicate one, but some inquiry is ncces- ' sary. Mr A, W. Masters opposed the mo- ] tion. ' Mr Michie: The hospital boards are still dealing with the matter and it * would be very unwise for our chair- 3 man. who is also chairman of the hos- ( pital board, to write to Lord Nuffield, * seeing that other members of the hospital board were against such a course.

Mr Houston: The whole of the hospital board members, with the exception of myself, were against writing to Lord Nuffield. If I were to write as chairman of the Farmers’ Union I could only use information which came to me through the hospital board. In view of this, I feci I cannot support the motion. The motion was lost.