SOCIAL SECURITY ACT

Southland Times, Issue 23634, 8 October 1938, Page 22

SOCIAL SECURITY ACT

Dr Jamieson Offers; Explanation ATTITUDE OF MEDICAL PROFESSION \ (Special to The Times) WELLINGTON, October 6. "The opposition of the medical profession to. the health provisions of the Social Security Act is because of the knowledge that the scheme is wrong in principle, because it meets neither the general health requirements of the people nor their special needs in sickness, and will result in lowering the general standard of medical practice in New Zealand,” declared Dr J. P. S. Jamieson, president of the New Zealand branch of the British Medical Association today. That our opposition is not due to financial considerations is shown by the fact that, while quite attractive proposals have been made to the profession to carry out the Government scheme, no discussion or consideration of those proposals has been entered upon by the association. The sole consideration of the profession has been what is best in the interests of the community as a whole. In view of the.situation that has been created, said Dr Jamieson, it was essential that this should be made public, and he proposed, therefore, to give the necessary edidence on the subject. “When the investigation committee under the chairmanship of Dr D. G.

McMillan, M.P., was conducting its inquiry 18 months ago,” said Dr Jamieson, “the profession was given to understand that the committee would be prepared to recommend payment to those of the profession accepting service at the rate of £1 a head of the population for every man, woman and child on his list. It was calculated that this would increase the income of general practitioners by 50 per cent on present earnings. Also all work outside the definition of general practitioner work would remain for private arrangement as at present, so that the practitioners’ earnings would be further augmented by the private fees received for such work. In addition all medicine and materials, such as dressings, hypodermics, and so on, used in consulting rooms would be provided free—everything within reason. Mileage, it was suggested, should be 4/- a mile one way, from one mile outside the nearest doctor’s residence, made up from 2/- borne by the patient (collected by the insurance authority and paid to the doctor), plus 2/borne by a special mileage fund constituted by deducting 1/- from the £1 capitation. Visiting hospital staffs, it. was stated, would be paid, a tentative \ figure of £5OO a year being mentioned for seniors and £2OO for juniors. Also to maintain efficiency by competition it was proposed, as a beginning to allow up to 3000 patients as the limit of the individual practitioner’s list, meaning an individual income of perhaps £3OOO a year plus extras. “APPROVAL OF GOVERNMENT” “Although it was made plain that the investigation committee was neither empowered to commit the Government nor had any responsibility for the finance of the scheme, it can hardly be imagined that proposals, from such a source were made without the knowledge and general approval of the Government. “These, if implemented, were very handsome terms,” said Dr Jamieson, “but the association would not allow, itself to be attracted by them, laying it down from the very beginning that it was not merely a question of how much money the profession might get, but of how tiie best health service could be provided for the people and the association has rigidly adhered to that attitude. Having built up the standard of medical practice in New Zealand, to as high a state of efficiency 'as obtains in any other country in the world, the medical profession is not only proud but jealous of that fact and cannot consent to be . a participating party in the lowering of that standard which it conscientiously believes will be the result if the Government’s proposals are acceded to.

“Later when addressing a public meeting at Newtown in August last the Rev. A. H. Nordmeyer, M.P., chairman of the Parliamentary Select Committee on national health insurance stated that ‘the Government realized that medical men should be amply rewarded, and would set aside £1,200,000 for their payment—there was no suggestion whatever of sweating the medical profession. That, sum was greater than the medical men themselves received today.’ ■ . - ■ “The following paragraph also appears in a letter, dated August 11 last, written to the association by the Hon. Peter Fraser, Minister of Health:— ‘Remuneration:, that is a matter upon which the Government is willing to enter into-immediate discussion. It is recognized ,that ,in the interests of the service the aggregate professional remuneration of practitioners as a whole should under the scheme be something better than it is under present conditions.’

“It will be seen then,” concluded Dr Jamieson, “that in the purely pecuniary aspect the profession, so far, has had no cause for apprehension. But we have always maintained that financial return is not everything. Consequently on August 13 last the association, confirming, a previous verbal statement by its representatives, notified the Government that, in view of the provision in the Bill to institute the universal scheme, no good purpose could be served by discussion on other details while this provision remained. It is only necessary to add that all decisions on this subject by the association have been unanimous after free discussion for which our organization offers perfect opportunity. Any representation that there is any considerable body of the profession holding different views is, therefore, unjustified and contrary to fact”