HOSPITAL RATING

Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 7, Issue 99, 15 August 1944, Page 5

HOSPITAL RATING

MOVE FOR ABOLITION

STAND BY" WHAKATANE BOARD

Whether or not the Whakatane Hospital Board should take active measures to urge upon the Government the necessity for altering the incidence of taxation whereby hospitals throughout the Dominion were now being maintained! was a question of considerable debate at the August meeting of the Whakatane Hospital Board* In view of the fact that the last Board, prior to the local bodies elections refused to give notice to any criticism of the Government's methods considering that its duty was to administrate and provide suitable hospital accommodation whether they agreed with the method of taxation or not, the outcome of such a suggestion may be regarded as indicative of the new outlook and policy of the present Board. The point was raised by Mr J. P. Caulfield when discussing the deliberations on the report of the recent Hospital Board's Association conference. He claimed that with the Social Security scheme now in full force the Board should not hesitate to express its opinion that only monies from this source should be utilised in the maintenance of hospital systems. It was utterly wrong to continue to levy an increasing hospital rate upon the, land. Mr Mullins was in full agreement and promptly moved that the Whakatane Hospital Board write to the Association urging it to assist other local bodies to bring pressure to bear upon the Government, for the abolition of the incidence in hospital taxation under the system now in vogue. Mr Caulfield seconded. Mr Suckling said he failed to agree. Irrespective of what the Board members might think personally it was their duty as a hospital board to merely carry out the responsibilities assigned to them. He would not like to see the Board mixed up in politics. It was a matter for the rating authorities themselves to complain to the Government about and it w r as obvious that the Association did not favour taking any action along tlie lines suggested. "I can't agree with that," said Mr A. F. McGougan. In actual cffect the hospitals are run by the ratepayers with the. assistance of Government subsidies and an association Which knows the mind of the ratepayers on this question should be prepared to actively support any movement which would make for a fairer state of affairs. Mr Burt contended that the Board already had it. in its hands to keep a tag on expenditure or otherwise. Mr Caulfield: It's the system we're up against, and if we don't raise the same protest the Government will assume that we, are in agreement with it. The chairman (Mr L. Buddie) s,aid that, he had made his attitude fairly clear right through .the piece. He did not consider the rating issue should ever be*brought within the scope, of the Hospital Board, but at the same "time, personally and individually, members were entitled to their own opinions. Much of the increased cost was undoubtedly due to the development of Social Security; so much so that the burden of the ratepayers had become quite inequitable. Individually, the Board was in full sympathy with the ratepayers though at the same time it was conscientiously imbued with the idea of maintaining tlie service. He could not see any harm therefore, in putting forward the viewpoint that would make the position more comfortable for the Board in the eyes of the ratepayers, and thereby urging the Association to clarify the position.

Mr Suckling still contended that any such move would be deliberately taking sides. x Mr Burt: Time we did take sides. Mr McGougan contended also that it was high time the Board changed its policy in order to bring pressure to bear. He contended that hospital boards should have combined with other local bodies long ago in this matter when they might have got -somewhere. The matter was then put to the meeting and carried with Mr Suckling dissenting.