Honorary Medical Staffs

Hawke's Bay Herald-Tribune, Issue 73, 13 April 1937, Page 6

Honorary Medical Staffs

MR. DUFFS MOTION Effect Not To Be Made Retrospective DR. BERRY'S REPLY

Baremajority decisions insteai Qf three-fourths majority de cisions are being sought by th Hawke's Bay Hospital Board re garding certain constitutiona measures. The board carried i motion by Mr. 0. Duff yesterday of which notice had previouslj been given, to amend by-law 53 whicli deals with the appoint ments and dismissals and the spe cifying of duties of members oi the honorary medical staff. In its present form the by-law stipulates that such decisions must be mad by not less than three-fourths oi the members of the board. If Mr Duff 's motion, now passed by the board, is approved by the Minister of Health the effect of it wil be that such decisions in futurc will be determined by a bare majority of members. This by-law was in prominence at a jrecent meeting of the Hoepital Board, jphen consideration was given to a motion that Dr. J. Allan Berry's seryices "be terminated as a member of the Napier honorary staff. On that occasion ,the chairman, Mr G. Lassen, xuled that although the voting was seven to two in. favour, the motion was not carried in aecordance -with the provisions of the by-law. * In the couree of yeeterday's diseussion, Mr Duff made it plain that nothing was being .directed against Dr. Berry by the suggested amendment, »nd that he did not desire it to be letrospeetive in effect. "In moving my motion I would like to mahe a preliminary explanation," said Mr Duff. 1 'It might be that many people think that motion is directed against Dr. Berry. I would like to make it quite clear that it is not. I ask members to regard it on the principle and not on personality. I can, aesure members that there is nothing directed against Dr. Berry or Dr. Wilson or against anyone else. Appointment and DismissaL "Our by-law deals with the honorary medical staff. It deals with their appointment and .dxsmissal and the epeciiying of certain duties. In' the interest oi tlie institution this should be the case. This by-law has been in operation i'or a 'long'time and no previous board has found it necessary. to invoke fsection 53. Thie board, however, had thought it necessary, and altogethor aeven members were in favour) it was unable to do so. This position seems to me to be wfong in the interests of the institution. Dr. Berry was the member of the honorary staff that was concerned; next time it might' be eomeone else. It is a necessary thing that the board should have proper control over its officers and it has not had that. I am moving this motion .to bring our by-law in conformity with the Act, ' ' cxplained Mr Duff. "In doing so I feel it will be something for the benefit of the hospital. "Members need not have any fears ftbout inflicting hardship on the honoraTy staff," said Mr Duff. "Members have to xemember that. this board can by a majority dispense with the medical superintendent or any other members of the medical staff. "Why we should not have the same right to deal with members of the honoraTy staff I have never been able to discovcr. It seems to me that the honorary staff should be placed on the same footing as the medical superintendent or the sother members of the staff. There is nothing to suggest that the members of the honoraTy staff would be treated in any unreasonable way. , A Great Asset, "Our honorary etaff has been a great asset to the hospital," continued Mr Duff. "They have given their serviees voluntarily and efficiently. In acknowledging that, we niust not as a board piace ourselves in a position whereby we can be controlled by the honorary staff. To-day we have two members of the honoraTy staff as members of the board. Aftcr the next election we may have four members of the honorary staff as board members, and it is possible that .the position might become serious. I see no reason whatever why Ihe honorary staff should not be subject to the same conditions as the etipcadiary staff. "If our by-law is aniended, it is not to have any retrospective effect at all, and is to apply only to the future," he added. In seeonding the motion, Mr Lassen said he was quite in agreement with the sentiments expressed by Mr Duff regarding the effect of the motion not being retrospective. "There is 110 doubfc that board members fully uuderstood Mr Duff and the way he pufc forward his motion," said Mr C. O. Morse. "1" feel that any logical arguments which I might present would be f utile • at the present jimcture, so I sliall say little. But J disagree with it beeause I think it would have been wiscr to bave dropped the matter pending an inquiry. I']] not argue; I'll mercly vote against the motion.'' "Wanfs Publicity" MIt seems that Mr Duff wants to attract a lot of publicity for himself — publicity that may last a long time and

will take a lot of living down," said Dr Berry. "There's going to be a difficulty ip getting nurses for the Napier Hospital soon. "Who will be to blame for that? "Several efforts have been made to get me off tbe board. I fought against the Memorial Hospital, Hastings, from the beginnig. I lost tbe fight, and since I have done my best since its erection to see that it has been run right.'1 Mr Lassen-, I don't know what all this has got to do with the motion. "I'm leading up to it," went on Dr Berry. "This motion is just part of what Mr Duff has been leading up to for montbs. I told Mr Duff once that this iboard could not enforce my resignation and that it was only wasting 4>l.n wionli'ti/* nll T?fiKritn!*V

Limt? uctnixi^ uutj , 26. Mr Duff knew he was a beatei I man before he started. On March 1' I. Mr Duff said that too much publicit; e had already been given to this unfor tunate business. I agree with him but he is still looking for publicity. I is nothing to Mr Duff, apparently, tha 1 I'm the senior surgeon on the honorari f staff by a large number of years." 1 Letter from Hon. W. E. Barnard » At the board meeting on Februarj . 15, Dr Berry went on, a letter wai £ considered from the Hon. W. E. Bar nard, M.P., and considered in com ' mittee. It requested that no publicity 3 be given $0 the subject matter of tbe J inquiry pending his iuterview with the ; Minister of Health. Mr Duff expressec himself to be in agreement for once | with Mr Barnard as far as publicitj ' was concerned. Mr Duff moved anc " Mr Campbell seconded the rather iml pudent motion that Mr Barnard be \ wxitten to thanking him fpr his interest . in hospital affairs and that he be asked to state more specifically what Napier Hospital matters he referred to. The board then resumed in open meeting and confirmed the above business. A motion, continued Dr Berry, was then immediately passed "That the minutes of the specjal meeting held on February 4, 1937, be taken in open board." Some foohsh people would think that if Mr Duff was sincere he would have. fought strenuously and recorded his vote against the publicity that would result and which he now ju frequently deplored. "On the .contrary, believe me or not," said Dr Berry, "who do you think? moved that motion? Mr Duff. Mr Morse seconded it. It is almost incredible. That meeting on February 4 was illegal, and as a lawyer Mr Duff should have known that. He knows that the board is going to pass this motion to amend the by-law, which must go before tbe Minister of Health, and may not be approved. "The motto of this board could well be that of St Paul: Taith, Hope and Charity.' 'i Minister Should Act* "Should the Minister of Health liave been in two imnds as to tbe granting of my request for an impartial inquiry, 1 am sure that this unfortunate motion would show to him not only th© character of the men . who comprise ■ this board but also. tbe absolute necessity for him to act and to act quickly." "I feel it rather futiie to say very much on.this question," said Mr Beuford. "I feel it is a little premature in viow of - the possible inquiry whicli might take place. I intend voting agamst it." "I do not think that Dj; Berry is quite iair in his personal attack on alr Duff,". said Mr S. J. McKee. "The board set up a committee to make certain investigations, and Dr Berry -has been making his, attack on JVlr Duff for the work tiiat the committee did." lu reply to the various members. Mr Duff saia that he feit that the statement made by Dr Berry was just as painful to other menjbers as it was to nim. "What he did say was painfiil co .have to hsten to," he added. Mr Morse said that he desired to have his vote recorded against tbe motion. Dr Berry : And mine. Mr Bedford: And miue. Mr Duff's motion was carried, the voting being. — For; Messrs Duff, Lassen, Hoadley, sCampbel], Harding, McKee and Di; Wilson. Against: Messrs. Morse and Bedford and Dr Berry.