PAEROA HOSPITAL.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXVI, Issue 4823, 20 April 1925, Page 2

PAEROA HOSPITAL.

PROPOSAL OBJECTED TO. DICSUCCIiON BY PLAINS COUNCIL. Hospital administration and matters pertaining to the proposed-Paeroa maternity and casualty hospital were discussed at Thursday’s meeting of the Hauraki Plains County Council. The Minister for Health, the Hon. M. Pomare, wrote with reference to the council’# protest against the decision of the Thames Hospital Board to expned £9OOO on a maternity hospital at Paeroa. The Minister stated that whilst of the opinion that a general hospital at Paeroa would be inadivsable, he considered a maternity hospital to be warranted, and had given his consent thereto. Plans had been prepared by the department and submitted to the board, but application from the board for formal consent had not been received. When this application was received it would be considered, together with the council’s protest, but in the meantime he would be glad to knbw why the council considered that a maternity hospital was not required. Cr. McLoughlin said that there was one at Thames.

Cr. Hare said that the project could not be stopped so it was no use objecting.

Cr McLoughlin said it was not the construction cost that was the hurdle, but the .annual maintenance.

Cr. -Harris said that the point was ’whether it. was warranted. There was a maternity hospital at Thames, and he*had been informed that there had only been one patient during the last four or five months. If that institution was not supported by the public, was it justifiable to build another institution and increase the hospital rate for the whole of the hospital district.

The chairman stated .that he had heard rumours of inattention at the Thames Maternity Annexe. He did not know if this was true, but it was significant that the institution was not patronised, and that if there was a loss the ratepayers had to bear the burden.

Cr. Harris moved that the Minister be informed that the council’s objection was owing to its opinion that it does not consider the Paeroa maternitv hospital would be used sufficiently to warrant the expenditure and the consequent increase in rates, and instance the example of loss already incurred in the Thames maternity annexe and the number of patients attended since its opening.

Seconded by Cr. Parfitt and carried, Cr«. Hare ' and Nicholson voting against.