IN PARLIAMENT.

Wairarapa Age, 20 January 1922, Page 5

IN PARLIAMENT.

HOSPITAL APPOINTMENTS. . “THOSE REPORTERS!” (The Age” Special.) Parliament Buildings, Jan. 19.— None of the clauses in the Hospital and Charitable Aid Amendment Ac r created as much dissent as clause 2 (the veto clause), which stijWilated that no appointment of certain administrative officers could be made without the approval of the Minister of Health. When the Bill was reported upon by the Public Health Committee this afternoon, the Hon. C. J. Parr announced that a compromise ha 4 been arrived at in committee. The Minister recounted his familiar argument that the Government was responsible for half the cost of the hospitals, and it considered it just that it should have a voice in the appointment of the administrative officers. There had been cases where hospital boards had made appointments on inefficient advice, and this even applied to some of the large boards, particularly in engineering positions. There was evidence of a great deal of money being wasted. The Department wished to secure for hospital boards the best

advice in these appointments. There were objections from all over the country, and the matter had been threshed out and a compromise agree! to. The Bill now required that before any appointment was decided upon by a hospital boaref it should forward to the Minister a list of the applicants; the Minister would then submit to the board for its guidance any expert information which the Minister thought fit. All that was asked of a hospital board was that it would give full and fair consideration to the recommendations of expert officers on the qualifications of the applicants. By this arrangement the objection to the veto clause had been removed.

Mr A. Harris: What happens if the hospital board does not accede to the rccommen dations ?

Mr Parr: They make the appointments and accept responsibility. He added that he thought that in nine cases out of 10 the boards would take advantage of the advice. The 46 smaller boards, in particular, would be glad to have advice.

UNDESIRABLES ON SHOWGROUNDS.

The fact that undesirable patrons of racing extend their patronage to show and sports meetings was mentioned by Mr V. Potter, in asking the Minister of Justice to amend the Gaming - Act so that it will apply to these parasites, and thus give the police an opportunity of dealing with them. The Hon. E. P. Lee replied that though he sympathised with the suggestion he did not think the Prime Minister would consent to any amendment of the Gaming Act this session. “THACKERISM.” The quaint phraseology used sometimes by Dr. Thacker provides members of the Press Gallery with paragraphs more that the usual reports of Parliamentary speeches, but this practice was resented by the member for Christchurch East, who asked Mr. Speaker what control was possessed by the House over the reports of members’ speeches when in committee. He had, he said, been misreported by newspapers on four ocea sions. These reporters— Mr Howard: Nasty things! (Laugh ter.)

Dr. Thacker: These reporters—have we no control over them?

Mr. Speaker explained that members of the Press Gallery were under no official control except in regard to a breach of privilege. Dr. Thacker asked what a member was to do when he was grossly misrepresented? It is not crfiminal libel, he explained, but it is designed misrepresentaton, and the Minister of Labour had just had to complain that he was misreported. Mr Young: Buy a newspaper.

The complaining member gave pressmen a further chance for striking headings ■when he subsequently criticised some remarks of the member for Wairau, declaring: “It is easy for a sausage machine to blow these things out. He is a bad fisherman; he does not understand his bait.”