DEPARTMENTAL ADVISER

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 73, Issue 370, 13 September 1930, Page 7

DEPARTMENTAL ADVISER

DE VALENTINE’S POSITION

A DEBATE IN PARLIAMENT AMENDMENT TO HEALTH VOTE [ Per Press Association, ] WELLINGTON, Sept. 13. The House went into Committee of Supply after carrying the motion to set up the Railway Construction Committee to deal with tho Estimates, and consideration of the vote of £240,000 for tho Department of Health wa„ resumed. Replying to Mr Samuel, the Hon. A. J. Stallworthy said that in every case the expressed consent of the patient was obtained before medical students were admitted to St. Helens’ Homes cases. «

Mr Martin took exception to the appointment of tho retiring DirectorGeneral of Health as adviser to tho Department at a salary of £5OO per annum. He contended that this was being done purely as a means of awarding superannuation, whereas the Director-General had had tho opportunity of joining the superannuation scheme while ho was in receipt of his salary, but had refused.

Mr Martin added that the appointment of an advisor would be an unwarranted reflection on the new Direc-tor-General. He moved that the total vote for the Department should bo reduced by £lOO as an indication of tho House’s disapproval of tho appointment.

Tho amendment was supported by Messrs Barnard, Fletcher, and Ky 1 and tho debate was proceeding when the House adjourned at 1 p.m. No Salary Increase. The House of Representatives resumed at 2.30 p.m., when consideration of the Health Department was continued in committee. Referring to tho amendment moved during the morning by Mr Lee Martin, the Hon. A. J. Stallworthy said there would be no increase in salary paid by tho Department of Health. Dr. Valintino would replace a officer at present in tho service of the Department, and there would actually be a saving of salaries. Furthermore, Dr. Valintine would be able, because of his long experience, to render much more valuable service to the Department. Mr H. T. Armstrong said that if the retiring officers were treated in the same way as Dr. Valintine had been, they would be foolish to pay into tho superannuation fund at all. Ho was not complaining against tho treatment of Dr. Valintine, but he considered that there were many other officers who could be given equally favourable treatment.

The Hon. A. J. Stallworthy pointed out that the salary of £5OO was not superannuation, nor was it a compassionate allowance. There would be many instances in which Dr. Valintine would be called upon to give the benefit of his experience when r decisions had to be reached on very important subjects.

Mr J. A. Nash said he was sorry that Mr Lee Martin had moved the amendment. If anyone in the Government’s service merited consideration, ho was satisfied that Dr. Valintine had qualified for it. He hoped the House would vote substantially against th amendment and show the same confidence in Dr. Valintine as had been reposed in him in the past. No Distinctions. Mr J. O’Brien asked whether a number of nurses and attendants who would shortly be retiring, and who had failed to join the superannuation fund, would bo given similar treatment. There were onty seven or eight people affected, and he hoped the Government would be agreetblo to place them on the same footing. These people were prepared to pay the necessary money into the superannuation fund. Mr J. Bitchener " suggested that members were losing sight of the real position. Tho grant for tho retiring Director-General had nothing to do with superannuation. The Hon. Stallworthy, replying to Mr O’Brien, said if the circumstances arose where any nurses could render the same service to the Department as Dr. Valintine would render, they would be given equally favourable treatment. Mr Lee Martin said he had no desire to attack Dr. Valintine, whose services he equally appreciated. He was attacking the principle involved. After further discussion the amendment was put to the committee. Mr Lee Martin called for a division and the bells were set ringing. However, when the amendment was again put, there no further challenge, and it was lost on the voices. Tho estimate was passed. INTERNAL AFFAIRS VOTE AN AMENDMENT MOVED PUBLICATION OF TENDERS [ Per Press Association. ] WELLINGTON, Sept. 12. The vote of £279,400 for the Department of Internal Affairs was considered in the House of Representatives this afternoon. Mr J. S. Fletcher moved that the sum be reduced by £1 as a protest against the action of the Stores Control Board in declining to publish tenders. He alleged that the board did not always accept the lowest tender and money was thus lost to the country. The Hon. P. A. do la Pcrrclle said the instructions to the board were to give preference and where possible buy New Zealand goods. He would look into the question of publishing tenders.

This estimate was still under discussion when tho House rose at 5.30 p.m. till 2.30 on Tuesday.