DEMAND FOR ECONOMIES

Taranaki Daily News, 1 December 1932, Page 4

DEMAND FOR ECONOMIES

HOSPITAL ADMINISTRATION ANSWER GIVEN LABOUR CRITICSATTACK BY THE PRIME MINISTER. DIFFICULTY NOT APPRECIATED. (By Wire— Parliamentary Reporter.) Wellington, Last Night. The Labour Party was taken severely to task by the Prime Minister, the Rt Hon. G. W. Forbes, during the committee stages of the Hospitals and Charitable Institutions Amendment Bill in the House of Representatives to-day, when he charged the Opposition with failing completely to appreciate the difficult situation facing the country and unwisely urging continued heavy expenditure at a time when the Dominion was entirely unable to afford it. “The Opposition thinks that because it has some secret source of tapping the springs of wealth everything in the country can be kept going the same as in prosperous times,” said Mr. Forbes, who declared that all possible economies had to be made for the relief of primary _ producers. Nearly 40 speakers had discussed Clause 6 of the Bill, which gives the Government power by Order-in-Council to abolish hospital districts on the recommendation of the special commission. The Government was obviously becoming impatient with the delay, and the Prime Minister rose to reply to critics on the Opposition benches. “Although we can admire the persistence and ingenuity of the members on the opposite side,” he began, “I think we have had a fairly long discussion on this I have not asked for urgency at this stage because I thought I could leave it to the reasonableness of the members to decide that the House should not sit too long. The speeches I have heard to-day are simply a repetition of what I heard last night The Opposition has no intention of discussing the clause but simply wishes to drag out the d'bate as long as it can.” OBJECT OF THE BILL. the object of the Bill, Mr. Forbes added, was to secure a reduction in the cost of hospital services. Did members think the country to-day was as prosperous and wealthy as it had been? Mr. A.- S. Richards (Lab.): Tedious repetltidn! Mr. Forbes said a great deal of the load was being carried by the country districts, and the farmers looked to Parliament to see there was no wastage and no overlapping. The Labour Party was apparently opposed to any effort to ease the burden of taxation. As soon as it saw that Some economies might be made it protested at once. Mr. W. E. Parry (Lab.): You are trying to butcher the social services! Mr. Forbes said economies in local body administration could be effected which would be most welcome to the country people. There was a burdensome load on them and they looked to the Government to see that the money they could ill spare was used to the best advantage. According to the terms of the Bill, if the commission recommended economies in hospital administration it was for the Government to decide whether they should be made or whether the efficiency of the service would be impaired by carrying them out. “We cannot balance our Budget to-day and we are not paying our way,” said Mr. Forbes. "We are not paying for the expenditure on hospitals. Supposing the I boards come to- US and we have to say we have no money; surely then the position would be worse than ever. . I have already announced that a commission is to be set up to inquire into the possibility of securing more economical administration of local bodies. The Bill provides one method of going into the question to see where the leakage is occurring, and how it can be stopped, and how savings can be made for the benefit of the ratepayers, particularly those in the country.” . ». .... ... • . - The country population, Mr, Forbes declared, was carrying a heavier load than the cities. Some relief had to be given, and if the commission could show that reductions could be made which would not affect the efficiency of the .services they would be all to the good. All the discussion was apparently a . move on the part of Labour to prevent the Government carrying out economies whifh were absolutely essential