PAEROA HOSPITAL.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXVII, Issue 4962, 14 April 1926, Page 3

PAEROA HOSPITAL.

- SUBSIDY PAID ON CROWN LAND.

7 TO MAKE A REFUND. ”* At Monday’s meeting of the Thames and Charitable Aid Board the y/.-jcJldwing communication from ■ .the ’ Director-General, arising, out, of the. ■ audit inspector’s report, was received :

“The auditors’ report brought ’to my notice that in claiming.subsidy

for the land h'a,nded over, to your, board for the purpose of the Paeroa ". hospital* subsidy has been claimed and ■paid on a valuation of Crown land j". which was reserved for this purpose, — ■being portions of the closed Russell, Johnson, and Fraser streets, and also a. portion of what, was the N.Z. Co-

-iQPPJative Dairy Company’s land. The ' Wiue df this: land was . included by ; you under the' heading ‘voluntary sV contributions’: hr your claim for sub-

sidy for-the period October 30, 1924. valuation shown by you was not by this office, but taken as the correct valuation of the land pre- ■ held by the Paeroa hospital tfufstees. As pointed out by the ■- a.uditor, subsidy should not have been claimed’ on the valuation of such Crown- lands, and it-appears, there; ; • fore, that your board has been oyer-, ’■? paid, subsidy as . follows,:. Closed ’ streets, £B6s*; N.Z. Dairy. Co.’s- land, ' £lOO ; total, £965. , It will now be . necessary for your ..board to provide t our estimates Joy 1926-27 for .•thijs. unt to be-refunded out of levy and 1 subsidy/’ ' , The secretary reported that the in•?,;rspecting accountant had. visited the / . office since the-, letter had . been received, and the question ,of . writing •»'. - off irrecoverable, fees had been thoiy oughly" gone into.. It had been sug- ■’ gested that such amounts should be • written off at periods jiot longer, than ’• “ three months by of .the., ’/...board. With reference 1 to'the 1 Paeroa the board ha,d no option .but. Wrefund the amount claimed.,. The "Honey could be paid out of the trust account. j?. • The chairman (Mr- W. E. Pale) ,ex-plained-that application for .the subi . sidv had been.: made in-good faith. Brenan said that so far as fie I®|abered-'the Director-GeneraJ had inspected .the area and .had had, -the titles of the land explained to him. ik The -Director-General, was familiar • <with the transactions. The speaker - maintained that the board was quite in claiming the subsidy oyer whole a.rea. The roads and dairy . ’ company’s land had. been taken, and </the--.whole area-had been consolidated j/ '-as' one sate for the purpose of .building the hospital. s The chairman, answering Mr Danby• said that there were. no. dedicated ; • roads 'when the subsidy- w.as applied ' for/ The board was, not-to blame in '« the matter, and it had acted in' good , faith. ' . < thought a refund should: / not; ike ma.de without a Struggle. • v -MrC. W. Kennedy agreed, and said Wtfid hot think the board should be /.•penalised if the department-had.made, a mistake. < ; ' Mr Btenan declared that 1 a .refund should not be made until legal ad's: vice had been : received. ' ./on the motion-of Mr Kennedy con-, j:' MKleration was deferred- until. the wr-msit df the Director-General.' , 1 Mr Brenan undertook to seek-the / -assistance of the member for the dis- / trict in the matter. <