HEALTH SERVICES

Wairarapa Times-Age, 29 April 1939, Page 9

HEALTH SERVICES

MINISTER AND MEDICAL ASSOCIATION GOVERNMENT DETERMINED TO PROCEED. ASSERTIONS NOT UNDERSTOOD. (By Telegraph—Press Association.) WELLINGTON, This Day. The determination of the Government to go ahead with its health scheme under the Social Security Act in spite of any difficulties that may be in the way was announced yesterday by the Minister of Health, Mr Fraser. He said'no Government could afford to permit any section to frustrate the expressed wish of the people. If the British Medical Association persisted in its present attitude its responsibility in delaying, curtailing or obstructing the scheme would be very great, and the odium of even a partial prevention of the people enjoying the full benefits would inevitably be associated with the instigators of its policy. He hoped that on further consideration the association would see fit to give that valuable assistance and cooperation which it was in a position to extend. Reviewing his with the association, the Minister said: In the association’s statement the Government scheme is erroneously represented as providing a ‘partial or limited service,’ whereas the Government’s proposals as embodied in the legislation provide for the establishment by stages of a complete range of treatment benefits for the sick and injured. DISCRIMINATORY SCHEME. “I am sorry to find that the association still advocates a discriminatory scheme under which the only persons eligible for free service will be those unable .to provide it for themselves. The Parliament and the people of New Zealand have declared against the association’s limited scheme and in favour of the Government’s Social Security Health proposals. I believe that many members of the medical profession share the view of the majority of the people expressed at the polls in October last. “I have seen the Press report of Dr. Jamieson’s comment in connection with the association’s official statement and note that he is of the opinion that the profession woiuld not object to maternity benefits in the form of a cash benefit not involving any contract between the Government and the doctors. MATERNITY BENEFITS. “I welcome this modification of the association’s official attitude as it implies that the profession has no objection to maternity benefits being available to all mothers, whatever their financial position. This, as outlined by Dr. Jamieson, would not, of course, achieve the object that the Government has in view, namely, the provision of free medical and nursing services in relation to maternity, but it is at least some evidence of increasing appreciation by the medical profession of the value and essential soundness of the Government's universal maternity and other health benefits.

“Unfortunately, experience abroad in connection with cash benefits in relation to maternity has been that many doctors have increased their charges so that the payment from the insurance fund benefited the doctors rather than the patients. “I wish here frankly to acknowledge the courtesy and general helpfulness of Dr. Jamieson and the other representatives of the association during the whole of the negotiations and discussions in connection with the Government’s proposals, and I express my personal gratitude to them. “At the same time, in view of the repeated offers by the Government to set up an organisation which would ensure that the professional control ol the health scheme was to a very great extent in the hands of the medical profession, I cannot understand the assertion repeatedly made from the ranks of the profession that the universal medical scheme would be State control in every aspect. In view of the measure of professional control freely offered that statement is absurd.”