“INSULT TO ELECTORS”

Sun (Auckland), Volume IV, Issue 1025, 16 July 1930, Page 7

“INSULT TO ELECTORS”

INDIGNANT HOSPITAL BOARD MEMBERS CONTROL OF INSTITUTION "An insult to the intelligence o£ the electors.” . . . “A little bit of Impertinence.” . . . “An astonishing statement.” ■ • • These terms were used by members o£ the Auckland Hospital Board yesterday afternoon, in expressing tlieir indignation at the recommendations on hospital finance and control, forwarded by the Chamber of Commerce. "I believe in the old method of trusting the electors,” declared the chairman of the board, Mr. William Wallace, in replying to the chamber's suggestion that the board should be nominated by local bodies. The electors were quite capable of electing the Mayor and councillors, and members iif other local bodies, he continued, and yet the chamber apparently thought them incapable of choosing the Hospital Board. “It seems to be an astonishing statement from a body of men who are banded together for business purposes and not to dictate the methods of control aud administration of the hospital,” he added. “1 don't think the chamber has done itself any good.” After commenting that the chamber gave the board credit for some aspects of hospital finance, Mr. Wallace proceeded to correct a misapprehension regarding its levies. The board, he said, did not levy on local authorities, which were merely the mediums of economical collection of the hoard’s rate in those portions of the board’s district. If the local bodies did not undertake this duty, the board would have to set up a rate-collecting department, the expense of which would be unwarranted. piscussing the ' extent of the board’s district, the chairman said he thought boundaries could be increased with great benefit. Many of the points raised by the chamber had already been discussed by the hospitals’ conference, and a number of changes would probably be given legislative effect shortly. One provision planned was the guaranteeing of hospital fees up to £25 and medical fees up to £25 in accident cases. "BIT OF IMPERTINENCE” Stating that he could understand the recommendations it there had bean dissatisfaction with the hospital’s administration. Mr. W. K. Howitt added that under the circumstances, the proposals were a "little bit of impertinence.” “How was the chamber able to judge whether more or less fees could be collected when there was a committee dealing with the question, he asked. “Where did all the information come from? Is the chamber working in the dark?” He claimed it was unfair for the chamber to go behind the board’s back, and added that members must be very good-natured to spend freely their days and nights trying to solve the hospital’s problems. "Don’t take the chamber too seriously," urged a member. "Yes. but it gets a man’s back up," retorted Mr. Howitt. “if it Is any consolation the board is not ’out in the cold’; one has only to read the newspapers to believe that Parliament has all the ‘scallywags in creation,’ ” commented Mr. M. .1. Savage amidst laughter. After re ferring to the present-day tendency toward "mud-slinging” at publicbodies and Parliament, the speaker suggested that some of those wb voiced all the criticism should stand for election. It did not follow they would be elected, however, he added.

The board dismissed the subject without further ado.