FRIENDLY SOCIETIES AND HOSPITAL FEES.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLI, Issue 12522, 15 March 1904, Page 6

FRIENDLY SOCIETIES AND HOSPITAL FEES.

DISCUSSION BY THE HOSPITAL BOARD. EXISTING CONCESSIONS REVOKED. The long-deferred discussion on the question of the concessions allowed to members of friendly societies in respect to fees for treatment in the Auckland i Hospital took place at yesterday's' meeting of the Hospital Board. Some months ago Mr. J. Bollard, M.H.R., gave notice to move, /''That the resolution under which the present concession ef half fees for adults and quarter fees for children is allowed to members of friendly societies, be rescinded," but for various reasons the motion was deferred from timo to time, and the discussion on it did not take place till yesterday's meeting. On the matter being reached on the order paper Mr. Bollard asked leave to withdraw his motion, stating that circumstances had altered since he gave notice of motion, in that the friendlv societies now had doctors of their own, and did not send their members to the hospital, as it was understood, unless they could not be properly treated in their own homes. The Chairman (Mr. G. J. Garland) moved, and Mr. J. A. Beale seconded pro forma, " That Mr. Bollard be allowed leave to withdraw his motion." Mr. J. R. Walters opposed the withdrawal of the motion. He said he would be inclined to allow matters to remain as at present if all the friendly societies' patients paid halffees. If Mr. Bollard's motion were withdrawn ho would give notice to move, " That half-fees bo charged to all the friendly societies' patients." At present, he believed, members of friendly societies each paid 2s, whioh covered their hospital expenses for a year. If they paid 4s they could pay higher hospital fees, and they would not feel the extra burden. • Mr. J. McLedd said that the friendly societies were doing what no other class were doing as a class, in providing for their own independence. When their members went to the hospital thej were ordered there by their doctors, and these were only extreme cases. Mr. Walters: And they do not wish to pay the full fees for these cases.

Mr. MoLeod said that the rank and file of the members of the friendly societies were drawn from the same class as those who went to. the hospital and paid : nothing. The present arrangement was not to the detriment of the hospital, as might be inferred from Mr. Walters' remarks; on the contrary, it was beneficial to the hospital which collected in fees twice as much as the OhristcKureh Hospital, and far more than was collected at Wellington or Dunedin, where similar arrangements in regard to friendly societies were nob in force. The.members of friendly societies paid for their. own doctors even whilst they were In the hospital. Last year the average amount collected per day from patients by, the Auckland Hospital was Is Old, as against 5-Jd at Ohristcburoh, 8d or 9d at Wellington, and 103 d at Dunedin. The societies paid as much as the Auckland averago for their children, and twice as much for their adult patients. Mr. Beale said that a person who put money in the Savings Bank was trying to make himself independent just as much as a member of one of these societies, and he was therefore-entitled to 'the same privileges. Mr. A. Bruce opposed th» present arrangeand said that the- members of friendly societies who took advantage of the concession were generally those who could afford to pay the full amount, so many of the poorer and improvident class of members having fallen out of membership. He especially opposed the quarter rates for children, as the beds they occupied cost as much for maintenance as those occupied by adults. The Chairman strongly supported the retention of the present arrangement, which he said, was profitable to the board, as friendly societies' patients paid about three times as much as the average amount paid by an equal manlier of ordinary patients. He was informed that many members of the societies found it as much as they could do to pay the 2s a week, as their hospital levy, and if this were so it was not likely that they would bo able to pay 32s a week for hospital treatment. As for asking; half-fees for children be believed that would upset the arrangement altogether, and result in a loss to the Board of £500 or £600 a year. . Mr. Bollard said that . the principle on which a hospital should be run was that, those able to pay should pay. Members of friendly societies should bo treated as individuals. Mr. MeLeod talked about tho independence of friendly societies, and there was much that he (the speaker) admired in these societies, but when they paid only half-fees and left the general publio or other patients to make up the balance, ho did not see where the independence came in. The fact that more money was received from members of the societies than from other patients was no argument, as the method was not based on a sound principle. The motion to allow Mr. Bollard leave to withdraw the resolution.was lost, and Mr. Bollard then moved the resolution to abolish the existing concession. Mr. Mcleod, replying to the remarks of previous speakers, said that every member of a friendly society as a taxpayer had a risfbt to free hospital treatment, but the societies wished to pay as much as they could in reason. Personally, he thought the societies were paying too much, and that i* would be a fair thing to ask the Government to fix the amount to be paid. If tho present concession was discontinued the finances of the Board would suffer.

Mr. J. Court said that many of the friendly society members who now went to the hospital would not pay anything if they did not go as members' of these societies, and he considered that the present arrangement was a good one financially for the Board. Mr. Bruce said the weakest part of the argument in favour of the present arrangement was that it was desired to allow many of those able to pay full hospital fees to escape with half-fees. He admitted that the friendly societies' payment might swell thft average receipts somewhat, but wha* - had swelled the amount more than anything was the policy of the Board in always making a point pi getting as much as possible from the patients. • Mr. M. Casey supported the continuance of the present arrangement, on the ground that the Board was benefiting by it. Mr. Beale said he had known member? of friendly societies who were worth thousands of pounds, and he did not think it fair that such men should escape with payment of half hospital fees. Such a thing was scandalous. Poverty was not always the reason for sending patients to a hospital. It might be necessary, owing to different circumstances, to send patients in good circumstances to the hospital, and he did not think it right that those people should bt. relieved from paying full fees. The Chairman repeated his previous remarks, and said that until it was shown that the present system was unprofitable to the Board he could not support an alteration, which would mean depriving the Board of a source of revenue, which brought them in some £600 or £700 a year, and, to compensate for which, it might bo necessary to rate, the local bodies. Mr. Bollard said the pith of the argument used by those opposing his motion was that the end justified the means. _ Ha had a great admiration for friendly societies, but he did not like to see them pauperised. Mr. McLeod: Do you consider that every person who goes to a hospital 13 a pauper? Mr. Bollard: If ho does not pay his fees he comes under that head. Mr. MeLcod: But they are all taxed for the maintenance of hospitals. Mr. Bollard's motion to rescind the existing arrangement was carried by five to three, the voting being: Ayes, Messrs. Bollard, Walters, Beale, Harris, and Bruce; noes, Messrs. Court, Casey, and the chairman. Mr. McT/eod refrained from voting, on the ground that ho was a member of a friendly society. It was accordingly decided to give the Friendly Societies' Conference a month's notice of the termination of the present Agreement, as from April 1.