HOSPITAL CONTROL

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LIX, Issue 17954, 5 December 1932, Page 2

HOSPITAL CONTROL

THE NEW LEGISLATION MR. D. W. .COLEMAN'S PROTEST . ~. ~A strong protest ;igainst the provisions of the new Hospitals Act in regard o the powers conferred on the Miinstei to , alter tiie conditions governing the noy • Altai boards without first comultimj Parliament, was registered by Mr. V, W. Coleman, member for Gisborne, anu himself a member of the pook Hospita Board for many years, during the debate hi the House of Representatives upon the new legislation proposed by the Government. Mr. Coleman declared that the provisions putting such powers into ■ the hands of the Minister would take away and restrict the power and usefulness of the hospital boards. “The bill is the'outcome and an instalment of the findings of the Economy Commission,”- declared Mr. Coleniam “For some time hospital boards have been receiving circular letters from the Health Department calling for economies, and because some of the boards have not done,,ail that was directed, because they 'bit to do so would impair their efficiency, and that the sick anti suffering would be detrimentally affected tb< Government, by Order-iii-Coun til’ is going to compel them to obey.. In the name of economy the facilities to assist our sick and suffering and destitute people are to he restricted. “If the Government thinks there is room for improvement in ottr hospital system I have no objections to a committee'being set UP t? investigate and the report to be considered by Parliament. I have a very strong objection, though, to a commission of one man,_ be lie a magistrate or ahyohe elke, haVmj the poNVer to say what a hospital noaid shall do or what it shall not do. “The Minister states that he is not hound to act upon the recommendations of the com mission. I would remind the Minister that- a tree is known by its fruit Bv past experiences of the Gov- «. enmieut Vlo We judge them. Every time a commission is reported in favor of cutting into our general services, that recommendation has beep adopted. Take, for instance, the recommendation.? to Cut (lie pensions of the old people, the .widows and orphans, the miners, the returned soldiers and the family ances. Also the recommendation that wages and salaries be reduced. I have got to know this Government, and realise only too well that any recommendations to curtail our splendid social services will be readily adopted by it. “Then by Order-fn-Council the hospital boards, whether they wish to or not, will be compelled to comply. I would remind the Minister, that membeis of the hospital boards hold their seats there by exactly the same method that he is in .this House. The people elected them. Surely they know the require- > men'ts of their own districts better than, anyone else, be is a Minister, Director of Health, or a commission. Anyhow, the. system of legislation 'or government by • Order-in-Council is pernicious. By this bill a hospital board can be compelled to . close down or restrict its old people s homes, cottage hospitals or any other, service it is rendering. Surely the people who have to pay for these services can be trusted to say if they should continue or’Pot. . “I am in accord with the provisions ot the bill that provide for maternity wards in hospitals in districts where there is not a St. Helen’s home But I am absolutely opposed to hospital boards beiim compelled to take over the St. Helen’s homes. This is only a means of throwing the cost of these institutions oil to the ratepayers of the respective districts. This is another recommendation of the lovely Economy Committee j On page 73 of the report they say, in dealing with St. Helen’s homes: And we see no reason why thesis special institutions controlled by the Health Dc* partment should not be handed over to the hosoital boards in the centres affected.’ . ' “In conclusion, I wish to say 1 am m accord with several clauses of the bill, particularly those restricting the hours of work for the nurses. I would have liked the Minister to have adopted our suggestions and made the hours of work a 48-hour week, but even as it is. it is a step forward. I siPmly rose to register mv obiections to clauses 2,3, and 6, and to'the pernicious principle of government by commission and Order-in-Council.” . . ,