Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

HOSPITALS BILL

SECOND READING IN THE HOUSEAMALGAMATION OF DISTR-CTS. WELLINGTON, November 22. In movin'g th^'eoiiond reading of the Hospitals and Charitable Institutiohs Amendment Bill <! hf “thle* House ! of-' R®pre sedatives to-day, the Hon. J. AYdung' said > the measure Wagf' designed Jma\ke further '‘pror'isidfi for " the amialgnm'aiibn; df small hospitals r ]! ,s " tridts; AmnlgahiatiOfa : eouHd ridt take place' at the "present time" unless 'by mutbal"consent of the Boards concerned'dr by legislation; 1 -The Bill brbiigKt hospital-bdasrcU 1 iifto l : ne' with- tberrla-fc relatihg to coUntfek and niunicipMitio 3 Mr I M. J. Savage • (Lab.“ ; Aucltkild West) said there was a tendency dbc-day to 'minimise rather than to" increase cervices, and fo r that reaso'n One "wits eri-titi-'d to utter, a-'warning against the danger that amalgamation‘ might 1, tnea-” the'cutting out of "country hospitals and institutions or’ services‘given tb country' districts.- Commenting on the clause '’elating-1 0 maternity services-"Mr Safi age said it appeared that the Government was endeavouring 'to transfer all ihe ''responsibility ; from the State to the Hospital Boards. • Mr W. E. Parry (Lab., Auckland ("VntTalV appealed to the Minister 'to give effect to the ; promise which he said had been made-'-by the United Government that a representative df the- irimates 'would be appointed to the Board controlling the Jubilee Institute for the Blind. - ‘-V: ■■ ' ■ '

OBJECTION TO PRINCIPLE. Mr P. Eraser (Lab;, Wellington Central) said the Bill took away powers which i-iglit-ly belonged -to • parliament He considered that- the: measure should be sent to the Health Committee so that its full- implications 'could be thoroughly considered. While tne Hospital Boards’ 'Association might have had an opportunity of examining some of- the 'proposals the public was very much concerned, particularly people in country - areas.- The representatives ofthe "smaller hospital afi. opportunity of placing their-'views not -before a Commission but - before the 'House. He objected to the principle of the people m- country districts being 'deprived of hospitals without Parliament being consulted. - . ’Mr-A. M;-Samuel (C.-. Thames) said country hospital bonrds were very concerned about; the Bill. which he con; sidered would confer autocratic powers upon a Government official '-in-the dirSctibn of hospital . administration. 8.-? agreed with Mf Fraser that th e Bill, shduld go to the Health Committee. 'He did not think ;it would he wise ' to appoint one-man Commissions. ■ Members with" a ' knowledge -of local conditions-' should be on a'U Commissions.-

Mr K. -S. :\Villiam s . (C;, r Bay of Plenty) said he hoped country districts would .be given every facility to submit evidence before- any; decision to ■ close hospitals was reached t-by" the v 'Com-" mission. '" •"< • / "

Air ,T. 'O’Brien (Lab., AVotst] and) emphasised the 'necessity- for .reasonable medical aid ia mining and. sawmilling districts. ••c-.-l ■

SCOPE FOR ECONOMY. . Air S. G. Smith' (C., New Plymouth) supported the Bill which he suggested might well go further. H© invited the Minister to consider the advisability of. proposing to Cabinet that the measure, should make -provision for a-fuller and wider investigation into the whole question of hospital administration. The country wag faced with a fall in the national income, and he advocated ah investigation, -not in AA’dlington, where evidence would be limited practically to the Departmental heads, but in the districts themselves with a view to maintaining hospital efficiency on one hand and effecting a greater reduction in expenditure <.n the other hand. Her pointed out -jhat 'there - should be 'scope for economy when it was realised that there were 45 hospital boards serving a ponulation of - only on© and a half millions.

■Replying to the debate, Mr Young said he did - nor believe in placing economy first. Efficiency - was the fir st consideration, and once a high standard of efficiency, was attained, .economy would automatically follow. The Bill was read a second time.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/HOG19321125.2.69

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Hokitika Guardian, 25 November 1932, Page 8

Word count
Tapeke kupu
621

HOSPITALS BILL Hokitika Guardian, 25 November 1932, Page 8

HOSPITALS BILL Hokitika Guardian, 25 November 1932, Page 8

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert