THE OTATO DAILY TIMES SATURDAY, DECEMBER 18, 1948. THE AMBULANCE SERVICE

Otago Daily Times, Issue 26958, 18 December 1948, Page 6

THE OTATO DAILY TIMES SATURDAY, DECEMBER 18, 1948. THE AMBULANCE SERVICE

The reference by Dr Moody, in an address to the St. John Ambulance Association, to the “niggardly” arrangement between the Otago Hospital Board and the association for the provision of ambulance services may be taken as foreshadowing acceptance by the board for the full cost of this essential work. It becomes clear, from Dr Moody’s iteration of the charges met by other major hospital boards for ambulance service, that in the Otago Board’s district the St. John organisation has been operating very economically, but under difficult conditions. These have been reflected to some extent in the service to the public, ambulances frequently being sent out during ordinary working hours —when voluntary ambulancemen are not available—with a driver only, while calls of less urgency sometimes cannot be answered promptly. The fault, obviously, does not lie with the St. John Ambulance Association; it is scarcely the fault of the Otago Hospital Board, which has had a good ambulance service at relatively low cost. But there is, as Dr Moody suggested, good reason why the board should consider the acceptance of a further financial responsibility in order that the association may continue its excellent and devoted work without financial drain on resources which are required for other phases of its activities.

In point of fact, the Hospital Board is legally required to provide a complete ambulance service in its area, and this it has scarcely done. The principle of free medical services, which rightly or wrongly has been established as State policy in New Zealand, must sooner or later be applied to ambulance work, and it is very desirable that in Dunedin the service should continue to operate free of bureaucratic control. Experience suggests strongly that a Stateoperated ambulance service would be infinitely more costly than one conducted by a voluntary organisation with public goodwill, and that it might also be expected to be considerably less efficient. A new arrangement, by which the service to patients was made entirely free, through the board’s acceptance of full responsibility for deficits in the running of ambulances, would retain the public support of the St. John Ambulance Association, and the experience in this work bom of long years of administration, and, what is very important and desirable, the principle of voluntary assistance from trained personnel.

THE IRISH REPUBLIC With, the passing of the Republic of Ireland Bill, Eire has severed its last official tie with the United Kingdom. In actual fact, Eire has been a republic since the revision of the Constitution was promulgated more than 10 years ago,' its only relationship with Great Britain being the External Relations Act—now repealed —which recognised the Crown for diplomatic purposes. It would be begging confusion to attempt to trace the rise of republicanism through the eccentricities of Irish internal politics, but the most remarkable aspect of this political eleutheromania is that the final, irrevocable step has been taken by the coalition of parties which combined to defeat Mr De Valera, the author of the project. The move to secure a republic has had the support of all parliamentary parties,, though Fine Gael, the strongest partner in Mr Costello’s coalition, has maintained that republican status was but a step towards closer relationships with the Commonwealth. Even if their sincerity is undoubted, the logic in this paradox, as the Economist commented recently, may not be apparent. '

It is, indeed, difficult to see how the new Republic of Eire, despite its peculiar historical associations with the United Kingdom, can continue to receive the privileges it formerly enjoyed within the Commonwealth. Having resigned from the community of nations which comprise the Commonwealth, Eire cannot expect to share the benefits which the members of this union extend to each other.’ The responsibility is now on Eire to evince proof of its proclaimed desire for closer relations with the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth. Will this be possible while the grievance of partition remains? All the evidence to be deduced from recent political trends in Eire suggests that it will not, and that full co-operation with the United Kingdom will never be offered while the six counties comprising Northern Ireland remain faithful to the British Crown. Once again the Economist might be quoted as expressing British opinion on this vexed question: This passion for unity is undoubtedly strong and sincere. But what the Irish fail to realise is how gravely they have prejudiced their chances of putting an end to partition. . . . Until 1939 there was a respectable body of opinion in Great Britain, particularly in the Liberal and Labour Parties, which sympathised with the object of Irish

reunion. . . . But if Mr Attlee refrained from making it quite clear that the partition issue is now utterly dead in Great Britain it was presumably only out of politeness to Dublin. . . . There are now new ties of loyalty and comradeship linking Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and . . . the more foreign and neutral Eire becomes, the more vital to Great Britain is Northern Ireland.

In other words, Great Britain will not consider handing over some thousands of loyal subjects to a “ foreign ” nation, however friendly that State might be, and the Government and people of Eire would be struggling under a‘ handicap if they were to permit the partition issue to confuse their progress towards the destiny they have planned.