HOSPITAL AMALGAMATION.

Southland Times, Issue 22449, 12 October 1934, Page 9

HOSPITAL AMALGAMATION.

To the Editor. Sir, —A circular has recently been issued to ratepayers and residents in the Wallace and Fiord Hospital area by those opposed to amalgamation of the Southland and Wallace and Fiord Hospital Boards. The title of the circular is ‘ls Wallace for Wallace?” and it contains a series of questions inquiring “Do you know?” In view of the fact that until recently the matter referred to had not been sufficiently discussed and understood, a few comments on the circular will not be amiss to your readers and more especially to the ratepayers and residents in the Wallace Hospital area. A more appropriate name for the circular would be “Riverton for Riverton.” The circular states that prior to 1905 the Wallace Hospital was included in the Southland Hospital district, but it conveniently omits to mention that at that time the board did not have the same standing and responsibilities as hospital boards of the present day. From 1885 to 1905 the Southland Hospital and Charitable Aid Board did not have anything to do with the direct administration of the different hospital. Its duties were merely a jpvy collecting body to collect rates from the various local bodies and apportion same to the hospital trustees who were appointed by the local authorities, the said trustees having control of the actual administration of the hospital. Owing to dissatisfaction over the apportionments of the moneys levied, two separate hospital areas were evolved each collecting its own rates, the trustee part of the business being cut out and the respective hospital boards wholly running the hospital in their own particular area. A further statement is that the late J. C. Thomson estimated that since the separation the ratepayers of Wallace had saved £74,000. No detailed account is given as to the manner of saving, whether it was in the menu of the patients or the number of staff retained at the hospital and it seems a queer position that quite recently the Wallace Hospital Board intimated that it was discontinuing its affiliation to Waipiata Sanatorium, presumably owing to the lack of finance. If that was one of the results of saving then undoubtedly it was false economy. The number of patients treated at Wallace since the separation is also given; but those responsible for the circular do not state how many patients have been sent from Wallace to Southland Hospital owing to the former being unable to treat them. Nor does the circular state that a considerable number of Wallace patients have gone to Southland on their own account when admission was possible and many also to private hospitals in Invercargill owing to their inability to gain admittance to Southland. The sum of £25,500 quoted as spent on improvements by the Wallace Board since 1905 has not convinced all of those requiring treatment that Wallace is as well equipped as Southland, the result being shown in the number of patients treated in Wallace during September, namely 18 persons, while quite a number went to Southland and private hospitals during the same period. The old man’s home is such a popular institution that at the present time it is closed and the two inmates that were formerly housed there are now resident in the hospital building. According to the circular those against amalgamation have certainly shifted their position regarding those who were responsible for the agitation regarding amalgamation. The deputation against amalgamation which waited on the Hospital Board at Riverton stated that the movement was to a large extent due to one man being jealous because he was not sitting at the board table, now the circular states that the Miners’ Union is trying to force the amalgamation of the tvzo boards. Neither of the above statements is correct. The actual position at present is the general dissatisfaction of many of the people in the Wallace district. Of all the representatives present which interviewed the board, asking the latter to consider amalgamation as contained in the letter they had received from the Health Department, only one delegate was representing the miners, the other twenty-eight being from local bodies and other organizations. This old threadbare idea of playing off one organiation against the rest of the community has had its day and the people of Wallace won’t be caught with that bait. Those who are in this for the benefit of humanity realize along with the general public that this is not a matter for one organization; hence the reason of the widespread support. The Health Department also considers that amalgamation would be in the interests of the Wallace residents having so stated in the letter to the Wallace Board asking that it should meet the Southland Board with that end in view.

The circular further states that if amalgamation is carried the hospital affairs in the Wallace district would pass completely out of the hands of the Wallace ratepayers. Under the amalgamated board the Wallace ratepayers would have representation on the board as provided for under the Act and while they would not have so many as at present, they will get their quota. Why does the Wallace Board not take the opportunity as suggested by the Health Department, and meet the Southland Board in conference? It would know then what conditions were being laid down and if it considered that harsh treatment was being meted out to it, the board could then _ acquaint the ratepayers of the position. While representation may be an essential matter, there is also the question of the best possible treatment for the sufferers which should be the first consideration and even if twice the number of members were on the present Wallace Board that would be poor consolation to the patient who was not getting adequate treatment due to lack of specialists to diagnose the disease or for want of up-to-date equipment. The £31,000 worth of buildings and equipment at present owned by the ratepayers could be put to a better use than is the case at present if amalgamation were completed. As I have previously stated 18 patients in the Wallace Hospital for the month of September and the old man s home closed does not augur well for the hospital when so many have gone to Southland and private hospitals. The watchword “Wallace is for Wallace’’ is not broad enough in outlook as far as the writer is concerned and I consider it more of a catchword than watchword. The motto for ■ those who favour progress should be “The best science can give in Southland and nothing less.”—l am, etc., L. S. EDMOND. Ohai, October 10, 1934.