THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 1920. TOO HIGH A PREMIUM.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 18050, 25 September 1920, Page 8

THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 1920. TOO HIGH A PREMIUM.

" And this is an insurance policy for the next election, but tho premium is too high, and there may be a total loss on the policy," was the crisp comment of Mr Downie Stewart on tho suggostiou that tho reason for the introduction of the Bill now popularly known as the South Otago Hospital Separation Bill was to strengthen Mr Malcolm's political position in Clutha. Mr Stewart's speech showed, however, that on its merits the Bill invites tho determined and intelligent opposition which it is meeting. We have made the position perfectly deal- that the interests of South Otago— and we have never ques tioned the strength of their claims to up-to-date hospital facilities—will best be served by the defeat of the separation movement and the carrying out of the Otago Hospital Board's programme, which provides for an extension of the Ivaitangata Cottage Hospital, and the establishment of new hospitals at Balclutha and Owaka. While we agree that these districts have been neglected in the past, it is positively amazing to find so much misrepresentation on the point of who is to blame for the nedect. Almost every supporter of separation repeats the phrase, proceeding straightway to build up upon it an argument for separation, "Dr Barnett says it's a scandal." Some of them go .further, of course, and even so judicial a critic as the Hon. Mr Lee, Minister of Justice, evidently misinterpreted Dr Barnett's views. Dγ Barnett made certain definite statements before the Public Health Committee in Wellington recently. After mentioning that his views had been previously stated at a conference which had been called by the Otago Hospital and Charitable Aid Board, Dr Barnett continued: — I u tlleh tha t £t was a scandal that such cottage hospitaJs were not in existence m bouth Otago, and Mr Malcolm used that statement in tho House as an argument in favour of separation, but as a matter of fact I declared that • separation dbaster * BUstake ' and a Dγ Barnett then reaffirmed his belief that ib was a scandal that the needs of South Otago had been neglected so long and said: But who is to Uaroo? it may be the Department of Public Health, it may be tie Otago Hospital Board, or it may be the representatives of the county and borough councils concerned, or it may be all combined. Personally, 1 cannot acquit the gentlemen who have been voicing their lamentations to-day of all blame I tWrt. thoy te"* l a little Larder that they would have obtained their cottage hospitals. Perhaps we may expect a less liberal use of the word "scandal" when the blame is placed on the right shoulders. Now that Dγ Barnett's exact words have been published, we hope that the leaders of this unfortunate hospital separation movement will seriously ask themselves who is to blame. If they can lay their hands on their hearts and find themselves innocent we shall be surprised. Any impartial reader who has followed this controversy must be disappointed with the extravagant arguments of the majority of the supporters of separation. The Minister of Public Health was himself one of the worst offenders, and we regret to have to say that Mr Parr's speech was neither judicial nor accurate. He is a young Minister with, we hope, a useful career before him, bufc with this Bill, combined with the attitude adopted towards his responsible officers in his speech, he has made an unfortunate beginning. He has shown a spirit of impetuous partisanship sadly out of place in a Minister, and it may be expected that the sober and logical advice tendered by the member for Dunedin West will not be wholly ignored. If Mr Parr's future Ministerial career be judged from his recent speech, it may safely be prophesied that it will be a stormy ono. It is, of course, a matter of perpetual disappointment and wonder that members of Parliament generally take so little pains to make themselves conversant with the essential facts of the situations with which they i deal. But Ministers are expected to understand the proposals of their own j departments. And while we give place to none in our insistence that South Otago must have improved hospital facilities, we once more affirm that by the establishment of a district hospital at Balclutha, with improved facilities at Kaitangata, and a new cottage hospital at Owaka, plus the right of entry to the Dunedin Hospital and the other established institutions, the requirements of the whole district can best be served. That was the programme of the Public Health Department and the Hospital Board before the advent of Mr Parr's mischievous BUI. That was a policy, too, which, applied nationally, has proved wise and beneficial, and anyone who seeks to upset it, whether he be Minister or private member, is rendering a distinct disservice to Otago and the dominion. And if the premium to be paid for strengthening the political position of any Otago member of Parliament is the disintegration of the present hospital district, then the premium is too high. And there is always the danger, as Mr Stewart hinted, that "there may be a total loss on the policy."