NO REFERENDUM ALLOWED

Southland Times, Issue 23336, 21 October 1937, Page 4

NO REFERENDUM ALLOWED

Joining Of Hospital Districts WALLACE PETITION REFUSED ORIGIN QUESTIONED BY MR DENHAM (From Our Parliamentary Reporter) WELLINGTON, October 20. The contention that the people of the Wallace hospital district should be permitted to express through a referendum their opinions on the proposed amalgamation of the Southland and Wallace and Fiord hospital districts was made by the Leader of the Opposition (the Hon. Adam Hamilton) when the Public Health Committee of the House reported on a petition on the subject in the House of Representatives today. The petition was signed by more than 3000 persons, who asked that the proposed amalgamation should not be proceeded with until a referendum had been taken. The committee reported that it had no recommendation to make. Mr Hamilton said he was disappointed with the report. The Minister of Education (the Hon. P. Fraser): It was a unanimous report. Mr Hamilton: Well, we will put it to the vote here and see how it goes. It was a matter of local interest, Mr Hamilton added, and the people of the Wallace district wished to settle it on their own behalf. The existence of the Wallace Hospital Board was threatened and they wished to have a referendum taken of the people of the district. Mr Fraser: You know that if it had not been for your representations the previous Minister would have carried out this amalgamation. Mr Hamilton: We discussed it, but the election came on and a lot of things went west. An amendment that a referendum of the people of the district should be taken was moved by Mr Hamilton, who said that at one time Wallace was part of the Southland hospital district, but 30 years ago it had been constituted a separate district. There were more than 12,000 people in the district and there were 18 smaller hospital districts in New Zealand. The commissioner who had been appointed to investigate the position generally had recommended amalgamation with Southland; mainly on the grounds that the people should have the right to be treated at a larger hospital if they wished. However, that could surely be done by agreement between the two boards. POWER SUPPLY REFERENDUM “Before the Southland power supply was taken over by the Government, the people were allowed to express their opinions through a referendum.” Mr Hamilton added. “All the people of the Wallace hospital district want is an opportunity to vote to determine whether the district goes out of existence or not.”

Mr J. Hargest (Nat., Awarua), who seconded the amendment, also claimed that the people who as ratepayers had built up the system were entitled to ask for a referendum on a question which involved a change of control. Mr Fraser said the legislation which had been carried out up to the present point had been the legislation of the past Government, which was now the Opposition. The last Government had started the legislation and passed it through the House. The Leader of the Opposition, who had moved the amendment, must at that time have been a supporter of the legislation. However, at that time no member of the House had mentioned a referendum.

“There is one thing which is even more important than harmony,” Mr Fraser said. “That is efficient treatment of the sick and the injured. I would not on any account recommend altering the law as this amendment would demand for just one special case.” Mr W. A. Bodkin (Nat., Central Otago), who pointed out that the position affected part of his electorate, supported the amendment. He said the Wallace board had been created partly for the reason that there had been a feeling in the district that the old Southland board was not giving as effective a service as it might He was not sure that under amalgamation the area would get adequate service When 3000 ratepayers of the Wallace Hospital Board district had petitioned for a referendum, the appeal ought to be granted. Mr W. M. C. Denham (Lab, Invercargill) said the petition originated from the “political enemies” of the Government. He alleged that paid canvassers had been employed to take round the petition and that a good many signator - ies had not understood the real significance of the question. Mr Hamilton asked for a division on the amendment, which was lost by 49 votes to 17.

Replying to the debate, Dr D. G. McMillan (Lab., Dunedin West), chairman of the Public Health Committee, charged the Opposition with trifling with the public by opposing the recommendation of the committee, which, he said, had been unanimous.