NEW HOSPITALS BILL.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LVIII, Issue 17978, 31 December 1921, Page 9

NEW HOSPITALS BILL.

APPOINTMENTS TO STAFFS,

POWERS OF lEi, MINISTER.

LOCAL BOARD'S OBJECTIONS. The remarks made on Wednesday by the Minister for Health, the Hon. C. J. Parr, by way of a reply to the Auckland Hospital Board's objections to the new Hospital Bill, were referred to yesterday by the chairman of the board, Mr. W. Wallace. He said the Minister had ig-

nored the'main point, which was that the Bill sought to give him power' to veto appointments made by the board. This could not be tolerated for one moment. " The position with regard to making appointments to the hospital staff," said Mr. Wallace, "is that whenever a vacancy occurs the post is advertised, and only the person having the best credentials is appointed," There was a decided objection to the Department of Health naming a candidate for a position on the hospital staff, for the reasou that it was possible that undue influence might be used in such a case, whereas, with the board composed of 14 men, most of whom had had a sonnd business training, it would not be likely that any candidate who undertook to canvass those members would succeed in gaining the support of a majority, Tho Auckland board had had experience of departmental influence in connection with a comparatively recent appointment to the hospital staff, said Mr. Wallace. When the position of patboh> gist and bacteriologist became vacant the board advertisoi for a suitable man in Britain, but the department submitted the name of an aspirant for the position, and endeavoured by every means to secure his appointmnt. The board refused to entertain the proposal for the reason that it had invited applications from the very best men in Britain. Everything was done by the department to prevent the board from .carrying out its intention, even to the extent of making a veiled threat that the Minister would be advised to stop payment of a subsidy for this important branch of the hospital.

Government's Share o! Hospital Costs. Despite this, the board engaged four of the most eminent authorities in London to select a suitable man, and in duo course an appointment had been made, and it had been fully justified. The Department of Health' had expressed the opinion that its pathological aud bacteriological work, and that at the hospital, should be done by one man. It had, however, been proved since that there was more than enough work at the hospital to keep the pathologist and bacteriologist fully employed, and the appointment of an assistant had subsequently been made in order to cope with the work. The Government's contribution toward the maintenance of the hospital was next referred to by Mr. Wallace. He said that Mr. Parr had stated that the Government contributed half the cost. The figures placed before the recent .Hospitals Commission showed, however, that the Government's maintenance subsidy was 15s 3d in the £ for the whole Dominion, and not £ for £, as had been stated by the Minister. If the Government had paid the Auckland board a £ for £ subsidy during tho last eight years, it would have received approximately £30,000 more than it actually did receive from the Government. During the period mentioned the board levied from the various local bodies a total of £280,489, and the subsidy paid on this sum was £250,591. ' . Mr. Wallace observed that the board acted not only in the interests of the ratepayers, but also in tho, interests of the taxpayers throughout its district, and if the Department "of Health secured the right to make appointments to the hospital staff—for that was what giving the Minister the power of veto would meanthere Would be endless friction between the, board and the staff, as the latter would naturally regard the department as its employer. A similar system existed some years ago. Under such a system, the efficiency of the hospital must inevitably suffer, and this would not be in the best interests of the people. Reply to Statements by the Minister. With reference to. the innuendo contained in Mr. Parr's statement, that some of the appointments to the Auckland hospital, staff had been unsatisfactory, Mr. Wallace said the Minister must have been hard pressed for something to say when he had to go back 20 years in order to find fault with the institution. During the fast 10 y<srs there had not been any inquiry in connection with the administration or conduct of the" Work at the hospital, and he challenged the Minister to name any appoiritment made by Ulie board over that period that had not been in the public interest. ~. In this connection Mi. Wallace suggested that the Minister should look to bis own department, and he also desired to remind Mr. Parr that "people in glass houses should not throw stones." Quite recently tho board, had a visit from a departmental officer sent up from Wellington to advise it as to the best method to adopt in buying supplies, and after he ha'd conferred With the Finance Committee he remarked, "Evidently you.are business men and know more about the matter liiaft I do." Mr. Parr had also said his department was iii a position to furnish the board with evidence that some work at the hospital t?s not biiing performed in a satinfactory manner. The speaker said it was strange that this was the first intimation the board Had received regarding the matter. If the Minister had such evi-

vne uoara iiac receivtu legiirunij; ure matter. If the Minister had such evidence the board would be pleased to receive it, arid he -could rest assured tho case or cases would bo very carefully inquired into. Mr. Pair could have no first-hand knowledge of the working of the different institutions under the board's control, for, although he had been a Minister fo? two years, he had not once visited the hospital or any of the other institutions, and the inference was that he was guided entirely by the advioo of his officers. Mr. Wallace ventured the opinion that the hospital compared more than favourably with any other similar institution south of the line. Opposition to Centralisation. "Mr. Parr ridicules the opinion that the new Bill aims at centralisation of control," said Mr. Wallace, "but when addressing the Hospital Boards' Conference on June 1, 1920, he said, 1 do not intend to abolish you this year,' and he thereby created the impression that at no distant date it was the intention of his department to administer all the hospitals in tie Dominion from Wellington. The Minister on that occasion also said, 'Doctora, like, school teachers, are not always business men. Their advice on expert matters must be taken,: but, when it comes to a question of business organisation, I am afraid the teachers and the doctera have a great deal to learn.*" Mr. Wallace remarked that whatever the Minister's experience may have been it had been admitted by his department that it could not criticise the administration of the Auckland Hospital. "That," be added, "speaks for itself." He coneluded by saying the board did not take exception to the framing of regulations in regard to maintenance fees, "but;" he : said. 'Ve will -fight to the last against the Minister obtaining the power of veto; and against the centralisation of control of hospitals in Wellington,"