Queensland
Parliamentary Debates [Hansard]
Legislative Assembly
WEDNESDAY, 1 SEPTEMBER 1943
Electronic reproduction of original hardcopy
Questions. [1 SEPTEMBER.] Art Union, &c., Bill. 233
PRICES AND SUBSIDY, WARM MILK. Mr. DECKER (Sandgate) asked the Secretary for Agriculture ancl Stock- '' 1. Has he macle any representatations to the Commonwealth authorities regard ing the restoration of the price margin of warm milk over cold milk in the metro politan area, and the guarantee of a sub sidy for a minimum period~ '' 2. If so, what representations has he macle and what reply (if any) has he received~ ' ' 'l.'he SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE ANn STOCI{ (Hon. T. L. Williams, Port Curtis) replied- '' J. and 2. I have made no representa tions to the Commonwealth authorities in the direction indicated, firstly, because no request of such a nature has been made to me, and secondly for the reason that the fixation of lJl·ices is not a State function. However, I have been in PAPER. The following paper was laid on the table- Bv-lnw No. 437 under the Railways Acts, ·Hll4- to J 93-1. FRIENDLY SOCIETIES ACTS AMEND MENT BILL. INITIATION. WEDNESDAY, 1 SEPTEMBER, 1943. The ATTORNEY-GENER\L (Hon. D. A, Gleclson, Ipswich): I move- Mr. SPEAKER (Hon. E. J. Hanson, " 'l'hat the House ·will, at its next sit Buranda) took the chair at 11 a.m. ting, resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider of the desirableness of introducing a Bill to amend the QUESTIONS. Friendly Societies Acts, 1913 to 1942, in MORTALITY TABLES, 1913-1939. certain particulars.'' Motion agreed to. lUr. L. J. BARNES (Cairns) asked the Secretary for Health and Home Affairs- " \Vhat percentage of deaths occurred ART UNION REGULATION ACTS in Queensland, on a population basis, AMENDMENT BILL. bet-ween the ages of 1 to 20, 20 to 40, 40 to 60, and 60 to 80 years (excluding INITIATION. deaths directly caused by accidents) dur The AT'l'ORNEY -GENlmAL (Hon. D. A. ing the years 1913 and 1939 ~'' Gleclson, Ipswich): I move- The SECRETARY FOR HEALTH AND '' That the House will, at its next sit HOJIE AFI<'AIRS (Hon. E. M. Hanlon, ting, resolve itself into a Committee of Ithaca) rep lie cl- the Whole to consider of the desirableness ''The information is being compiled, and of introducing a Bill to amend the Art if the hon. member asks his question at Union Regulation Acts, 1930 to 1941, in a later elate the information will be sup certain particulars.'' pliec1.'' ::\fotion agreed to. 234 Hospitals Act Amendment Bill. [ASSEMBLY.] Hospitals Act Amendment Bill. SUCCESSION ACTS AND ANOTHER ACT give hocpital authorities the opportmiity of AMENDMENT BILL. making provision in their own areas for incurable cases and the comfort and eare of INITIATION. aged persons. At the present time only two The AT'.I'ORNEY-GENERAL (Hon. D. A. institutions are conducted by the State in Gledson, Ipswich): I move- Queensland for the care of the aged who have no relatives to look after them or who '' That the House will, at its next sit· decline to have the care of relatives, one at ting, resolve itself into a Committee of Charters Towers and one at Dnnwich. It the Whole to consider of the desirableness would be far more suitable and far more of introducing a Bill to amend the Succes comfortable and cheerful for the old people sion Acts, 1867 to 1942, and the Public if they could be cared for in the locality Curator Acts, 1915 to 1942, each in certain in which they have lived and in which they particulars.'' would have their friends. Motion agreed to. li'Ir. Decker: That would be a new cost on hospitals boards~ HOSPI'l'ALS ACT AMENDMENT BILL. Tlle SECRETARY FOR HJEAL'l'H ANn INITIATION IN COMMITTEE. HOJfE A.Fl'AIUS: That is so. If a hos (The Chairman of Committees, Mr. Brassing pitals board extends its activities in that ton, Fortitude Valley, in the chair.) direction the cost will be borne under the Hospitals Act as it stands at the time. The The SEC.RE'l'ARY FOR HEALTH AND Dill does not in any way prevent the Govern HOJIE XFI<'AIRS (Hon. E. M. Hanlon, ment from giving direct assistance to hos Ithaca) (11.10 a.m.): I move- pitals boards for the purpose if the Govern ment decide that is the proper cour~e to '' That it is desirable that a Bill be take and the finances of the State enable it introduced to amend the Hospitals Act of to be done. Hon. members will appreciate 1936 in certain particulars.'' the fact that the present Government have 'l'he main clause in the Bill provides for the given vast sums of money to hospitals reduction of the proportion of the cost of boards for building purposes apart altogether hospital administration now being borne by from the precepts the Government have to local authorities. Since the passing of the pay under the law, and there will be Hospitals Act in 1923 the cost has been nothing to prevent the Government of the borne, as to 60 per cent. by the Government rlay-I presume that in the future it will and 40 per cent. by the local authorities. be this Government-from continuing to The Government took the matter into con help hospitals boards in the p-encrous and sideration at the beginning of the present considerate way in which we have treated ~nancial year and decided that the propor them in the past. Furthermore, there is the tJon should be altered. They thought it prospect that some share of hospital cosh; would he better to bear 75 per cent. of the will be borne by another Government and cost of hospitals, leaving 25 per cent. only that consequently the hospital authorities to be borne by the local authorities. mav be able to enter into a wider field of work. The rather unusual course was taken of announcing the proposal of the Government Undoubtedly the care of the aged and the ~t the . t~me . the decision was made, that is, incurable, particularly the incurable, should m antic1patwn of the approval of Parlia be somewhere in the vicinity of their rela ment, . but the _Government hail every reason tives. When a person is suffering from an to believe Parliament would endorse it. We incurable disease, at that time in particular did not expect . :'ery strenuous opposition he or she desires to be near relatives, and the from the Opposition. It was necessary to relatives desire to be in touch with the make the announcement at the beginning of patient, and notwithstanding the fart that the financial year so that hospitals boards the Diamantina Hospital in Brisbane has and loca~ governing bodies could prepare been one of the outstanding institutions of then estimates for the current financial the Commonwealth and I believe in the year. Had it been delayed until Parliament world for its care of the incurable, I hold dealt with the matter, all the work of pre the opinion that a hardship was inflicted by paring the estimates would have had to be bringing such people from the North, the scrapped and new estimates prepared. That \Vest, anr1 Central Queenslnnd to Brisbane. is the reason why the Government decidec1 A person suffering from an incurable disease to depart from the established practice in needs nursing and care, but not skilled medi regard to proposals that require the cal attention. Medical scie11ce can do noth approval of Parliament. ing to cure a person suffering from an incur able disease, and all that can be done is to In addition to the provision as regards make him as comfortable as possible by pro precepts, the Bill makes provision for viding the necessary nursing services and ":'larging the activities of hospital authori all the comforts that society can afford to tles. At the pre~ent time there is a very giYc in the last few years or mo11ths of wide definition of the treatment of the sick, his life. It is at that time particularly bn t we propose to add to that definition of that he desires to be within reach of relatives, the prmers ancl responsibility of hosnitnl and this Bill will make provision for the authorities the comfort of the aged and the future development of hospital services in care of the incurable, the idea being to that respect and will add greatly to the Hospitals Act Amendment Bill. [1 SEPTEMBER.] Hospitals Act Amendment Bill. 235 social services the Government can give to accept them as an added and very desirable the suffering members of the community. improvement in our social service system. The need for such an extension has been Mr. NICKLIN (Murrumba) (11.21 a.m.): felt. Some hospitals are already doing it As the Minister has said, it is unusual for the although no provision is made in the Act. Government to announce their intention in Hon. members must know that in a number connection with legislation before that legisla of country hospitals there are old men's tion is introduced. We all appreciate the wards. I am sure that hon. members have reason why it was done-to enable local been to see some of these, and representatives authorities and hospitals boards to frame their of country districts I am sure know of budgets within the time a's set out in the instances in which people are kept in hospital Act-and that is desirable. when really they are in need of only a bed in an institution such as at Dunwich or the The Minister also said that he felt sure the Diamantina Hospital. The authorities have Opposition would entirely concur with the not the hardness of heart to send them away provisions of the Bill. I am going to dis and the hospital superintendents and nurses appoint the Minister sadly in that direction keep them on. I know of some hospitals in because, although we agree with the reduction which there may be perhaps 15 or 16 old we also maintain that at the present time, pioneers of the district, who have given their taking into consideration the state of the lives to the services of that locality and who Government's finances and the incidence of are kept in the hospital but who really should this taxation, the burden on the local not be a charge on the hospitals board under authorities should be removed altogether. The the Act. In the city hospitals you will find Minister himself has given us further argu· incurable cases that have been there perhaps ments in support of our suggestion, because for a year or more. one of the provisions of the a;mending Bill can impose greater obligations on hospital These people are kept there although they authorities. Although local authorities will be are really cases for admission to an institution relieved of part of their contribution for incurable disea·ses. Although the obliga towards the upkeep of hospitals-15 per cent. tion is not placed upon hospitaf authorities. to !'lf the total cost-it is possible that hospitals do this, their natural desire to give every con boards will increase th-eir expenses by an sideration and comfort to the people causes amount in excess of this saving as a result them to undertake that little final service to of the other activities that they can now the pioneers in their own district. In this undertake. amending Bill we are adding these functions The Minister said, too, that he is hopeful to the hospitals, and I visualise that as our that the cost of hospital services may be social services develop there will be no more shared by the Commonwealth Government at concentration of old and incurable people in some time in the near future. In view of one or two areas of the State. They will be that fact and having regard to the fact that provided in their own neighbourhood with the present system of hospital taxation-the the comfOTt, security and care tha.t have been imposition of precepts on local authorities given in the larger Government institutions is inequitable, the Opposition is strongly of and thus be within reach of their friends and the opinion that in the existing circumstances relatives, and the closing years of their lives there should be a complete suspension of will be made that much happier. payment by local authorities towards the We have also two formal machinery amend upkeep of hospitals. I therefore move the ments in this measure. One provides for the following amendment:- election of a deputy chairman of a hospitals '' Add to the question the words- board. Under the Act of 1936 provision was ' including the suspension of payments made for the election of a deputy chairma'n at by local authorities towards the upkeep the first meeting after the constitution of the of hospitals.' '' board, and the possibility of a deputy chair man's lea'ving office or dying was overlooked, J\fy first reason for moving the amendment and no provision was made for the election of is that taxation on land for the purpose of a succeeding deputy chairman in such case. meeting hospital precepts is unfair and It is one of those simple little things that are in0quitable, and that ,has been the attitude over looked occasionally in the drafting of consistently taken up by the Opposition in legislation. Boards have appointed a successor connection with hospital legislation, on the to the deputy chairman, but there is the Estimates and on other occasions. We have possibility that decisions of a deputy chainnan always stronglv opposed the practice of levy who is elected in that way may be challenged ing a tax on iand to meet hospital precepts. in a court and we make this provision to Jir. Healy: Did the Moore Government guard against that possibility. do that, too 1 We are also extending to hospitals boards ::\Ir. :XICKLIN: Hon. members ask did the same facilities for the service of docu· the l\'Ioore Government do this and did the ments ·for the recovery of fees as are pTOvided Moore Government do that, but we' must have in the Local Government Act, that summonses rcganl to the position in the. State to-d~y, may be served by post and not necessarily by and be·ar in mind the difference m the financ1al personal delivery. position in 1932 and 194.3. That alone i~. a Those are the proposals in the Bill we have sufficient answer to the questions by hon. to place before Parliament a'nd I do not think members opposite. any objection can be taken to them. Rather Let us consider \Yhether it is fair to impose do I think that hon. members generally should an extra tnx upon landholders to meet hospital 236 Hospitals Act Amendment Bill. [ASSEMBLY.] Hospitals Act Amendment Bill. precepts. It is a very inequitable form of of the community and will not as at present taxation, especially on primary producers and cause one section to pay more than its fair other landholders who make their living from share of the cost of maintaining our hospitals. the 18 nd. On analysing some of the precepts paid by local authorities for hospital purposes Another aspect of this taxation that is the unfairness of the system immediate,Jy unfair should be mentioned. If, for example becomes apparent. I quote for example the the primary producer has a bad season and Goondiwindi Hospitals Board. The town of makes a loss on his year's operations he is Goondiwindi itself provide;,; £180 out of a still compelled to contribute his share' of the total precept of £2,422, leaving the Waggamba hospital precept, because it comes out of the Shire to provide £2,241. The to>v11ship of rates he pays on his land. Is it right to Goondiwindi itself, in which the hospital is expect a man who makes a loss during the situated, and which no uoubt uses the hospital year on his business to pay a contribution to a greater extent that the people living in towards a hospital precept when there are the Shire of Waggamba contributes the small men on high salaries who do not contribute sum of £180 against the sum of £2,241 con one penny towards this object~ The incidence tributed by the shire. of the taxation is not equitable and it shou!f1 be abolished as quickly as possible. This is Now let me turn to a city represented by an excellent opportunity to do it, when the the Attorney-General. The Ipswich Hospitals StatP :hnances are in a buoyant condition BoArd requires £10,968 from its component and are able to bear it. That is the reason local authorities as its share of the precept. why we have moved this amendment. The eity of Ipswich contributes £2,478, while the Esk Shire-Esk is a long way from The scron 11r. MULLER (Fassifern) (11.36 a.m) : show the general position. The population of In supporting the amendment moved by the Ipswich is about five times as great as the Leader of the Opposition, I wish to say that population of the Esk shire, yet the payment I am ke Commonwealth Government for every bit of because they say that one section only contri help we can get~ It is the greatest argument butes-the ratepayers-so do we in the cities I have heard in support of unification. If object. In the city of Brisbane the ratepayers you ask the Commonwealth Government to contribute Hd. in the £1 towards the hospital absorb a State, department such as that of precept. The amount levied on the Brisbane Public Health you may just as well ask them City Council for this purpose last year was to abolish the State and discharge all the approximately £120,000, which was paid by functions of the State. I do not agree with one section of the community, the ratepayers, that principle. We should do it ourselv~s and yet we have the spectacle that while and the people of Queensland can afford to certain ratepayers can be admitted to the do it themselves. I am complaining this Brisbane General Hospital, treated and morning that the method of taxation is charged for the treatment even though they iniquitous and that each and every member have contributed to the precept for years, a of the community should be asked to make large section of ratepayers in the city are a fair contribution for the maintenance of denied that treatment because of their our hospitals on their capacity to pay. income, despite the fact that they pay a tremendous amount in precepts through the The CHAIRiliAN: Order! I have listened council and in taxation towards hospital to the hon. member and other hon. members upkeep. and rule that debate on the Commonwealth The time has arrived for a review of the responsibility in this matter cannot be allowed. methods of financing hospitals in this State, There is an item on the business-sheet for to and I feel that this Bill is being brought morrow on that question and it may be fully down to-day in anticipation of the Govern discussed then. ment's receiving further aid from the Commonwealth Government. The SECRETARY FOR HEALTH AND HOME AF:FAIRS (Hon. E. M. Hanlon, The CHAJR)IAN: Orde1·! Ithaca) (11.47 a.m.): The amendment of the Leader of the Opposition, I contend, is ont of 1\Ir. UECKER: Like many other hon. order, Mr. Brassington, as it is outside the members I feel that we have an opportunity order of lc:1ve. It would impose a cost on now to shoulder a far bigger responsibility the Crown that is in excess of the amount so far as the upkeep of hospitals is concerned contemplated in his Excellency's message. by spreading hospital ta.' the last 12 months, and then only voluntarily industry. In many instances the workers not compulsorily. Even then it has operated have agreed to contribute-say, ls. a week only upon the condition that the person con each. ~erne_d depel!-ds solely upon the old-age or mvahd pension for his income. Like the llir. }fuller: Fo1· which they get free L~ader· of the_ 9pposition, although I agree treatment. With the provisiOn for the reduction of the local _authority precept to 25 per cent. of the Mr. COLLINS: It is a splendid service, cost, It seems to me that the time has arrived and an insurance scheme, too. It is a splendid for the suspension of all charges on the local arrangement and I know that many hospitals authority. in the country have encouraged the workers to contribute to such schemes. Therefore, I The CHAIRMAN: Order! That principle again say that hospitals obtain their funds has been disposed of already. from many sources. Hon. members opposite would make it appear that the contribution lUr. DECKER: The proposed alteration by local authorities is out of all proportion from 60-40 per cent. to 75-25 per cent. is not to what they should reasonably be required to actually a saving in precept to the local contribute, but will anyone say that there is authority. not some responsibility upon local communi Very careful consideration will have to be ties to care for their sick people~ Therefore, given to the additional obligations proposed any scheme that provides for a contribution by the Bill. After all, it would appear that by the localities concerned for the main the proposed cut in hospital contribution is tenance of their sick people has a reasonable only a surface cut, as it were and that the basis of equity and justice. It is the local authorities concerned wili have to incur undoubted responsibility of ordinary decent additio_n~l obligations that were outlined by people to see that the sick members of their the Mimster. As I have said that is a community are properly cared for. matter that ~ill h~ve to be con~idered very carefull:f, whi~h brmgs ';IS back to the point JUr. Muller: But why should they pay -what IS a fa~r and eqmtable way of raising for it twice~ funds for hospital purposes~ I think the time has arrived when we should carefully examine Mr. COLLINS: They do not pay for it an equitable scheme in an atmosphere free twice. It has been stressed by hon. members from heat and party passions with the direct opposite that owners of farming land pay an purpose of spreading the burden over all the amount greatly in excess of that paid by people of the State. owners of property in the city, but with all schemes of taxation it is always difficult to see that it operates justly in every particular. }~r. COLLIN_S (Cook) (11.56 a.m.): I desne to comphment the Minister in charge For instance, in the cities a quarter of an acre of the Bill upon the relief that he proposes of land may have an unimproved value of to extend to local authorities in the cost of £5,000 and, consequently, will attract a very the upkeep of hospitals. The relief is a high contribution for hospital expenditure. Yery s:rbs~antial one _and will represent a big Even land in residential areas may be valued r:duchon m the cost mcurred by local authori as high as £400, and I venture to say that t~es. I know that it will be appreciated con there are many farms upon which owners Siderably by people living in the country. depend entirely for their means of livelihood that have not an unimproved value of more . Mr. Maher: Do you not think that in than £400. The scheme does not bear so Yiew of the buoyant Government revenue we unjustly on the man on the land as has been are entitled to say that there should be a attempted to be made out. The local authori complete suspension of payments by local ties' share of hospitals expenditure has not authorities~ been such a tremendous thing when all is said and done, but a great deal of political lUr. COLLINS: This is a step in the capital has always been made out of it. right direction. I know, too, that buoyant revenue can be easily dissipated if it is handed As a result of the system that has out to everyone who asks for it. This is a operated in Queensland for a number of years, step in the right direction, but, judging from this State stands out in the whole Common the arguments so far advanced by those hon. wealth for its hospital accommodation. The members opposite who have spoken, one might standard that Queensland has enjoyed for conclude that th_e whole cost of hospital many years is the standard that the Common upkeep was contnbuted by local authorities wealth generally would like to live up to. whereas that is not so. Every hon. memhe; Who would say that we should have had our knows full well that hospitals deri,-e their present standard if this Government had not funds from a number of sources. If a hos years ago set about improving our hospital pital is correctly and efficiently managed its system W payments from paying patients' fees sh~uld We know the value of the hospital, par largely cover the entire cost of hospital ticularly in country centres. My only regret upkeep. However, if this source of revenue is that we cannot get the services of doctors is not adequate, the deficiency is made up by in the outback that is desired, but with the contributions by the Government and local steps being taken to educate more doctors, authorities in the prescribed proportion. that difficulty will be overcome. Look at the There may also be grants to the hospital con expense that is saved by the person resident cerned from Golden Casket funds and there in the country if he can get hospital treat may be contributions from workers in ment in his own district, shire, or town. 240 Hospitals Act Amendment Bill. [ASSEMBLY.] Hospitals Act Amendment Bill. It saves him a considerable amount of expense to look after themselves. It would be a great in going to the larger centres, where otherwise hardship for the boards to send them away hospitals only would exist, by sending his rela from their mates, for perhaps the rest of a tives there. Is not that generous service to the lifetime, to Dunwich or the Eventide Home at community worth paying for? I venture to Charters Towers. Consequently, many beds say it is. in their institutions are at present occupied by these honourable old gentlemen. It is JUr. I\Iaher: Why should the tax be due to these boards, which have been looking collected from one section of the community after these patients, that they should he only~ allowed to make some other provision for them. Mr. COLLINS: It is not collected from one section of the community only. That is I think that will be an advance in hospital where the hon. member is entirely wrong. schemes that 1.vill be aYa.iled of by the boards. It will be a great advantage to the agec1 lir. I\Iaher: No. persons to whom we owe a great deal ami for whom, in many respects, we have done I\Ir. COLLII'S: The hon. member must very little. not overlook the fact that the Government I commend the Minister for the alteration contribute and have always contributed 60 he seeks to bring about in the Act. I know per cent. of the hospital expenditure. That is how pleased the people in the country areas not the whole cost. are that the reduction in local contribution is Mr. lUaher: There are wealthy people being made. To show the lack of sincerity in many provincial cities who escape hospital on th;:: part of our opponents who criticise taxation altogether. the Bill I remind them that ,when their party were the Government many y0ars ago they lU:r. COLLINS: I venture to say that appointed a royal commission to inquire into the Government's contribution, at present 60 this very thing, and whateYer the report of per cent., comes very largely from that wealthy that commission was, the Government left the section the hon. member for West Moreton Hospitals Act exactly as they found it. It alludes to. Through taxation they not only would not have been so bad if it had not been pay the local authority precept through rates one of the principal planks of their platform. struck on their home allotments but also pay They went to the country and amongst other indirectly through taxation levied by the things said to the people: '' vV e will wipe Government. Therefore, they contribute in out this iniquitous tax, whirh is taking all two ways. There is, perhaps, a section of the the profits from all your land and all your people who own very large tracts of land who effort.'' They made a great case against may be mther heavily taxed, but as a rule it and I believe it was largely responsible where tho>e great areas exist the local rates for the bit of a swing in public opinion. As are very low. That being so, the impost does happened in regard to many other things, not bear very unjustly on the big pastoralist. they simpl:- repudiated that promise when As a rule, too, he has ample funds to come they had the opportunity of carrying it out. and go on, which enables him to pay his way. Although they a'ppointed a royal commission I do not !mow that it has been the cause of and talked about it they did not do anything any great hardship. In the main, the hos to eliminate the charge, and now they have pital tax has been one of the fine~t features the temerity to criticise this Government for of our social legislation and social benefits bringing down a Bill to reduce the contribu this Government have brought about, and one tion by local authorities. I think their of the great social advantages that have been insincerity damm the proposals they put enjoyed by the people throughout the city forward now. and country areas. Take the great benefits :3Ir. SPARKES (Aubigny) (12.9 p.m,): that haYe accrued from the establiPhment of As a local-authority man I appreciate the maternity hospitals through the Government's small reduction the Government propose, but hospital policy. To-day, there are 112 public it seems to me that th;:: Government were maternity hospitals throughout the State. belting us with two waddies and they dropped They have been of tremendous advantage to one and kept the other. I should like the the people. The fact that these maternity Government to drop both waddies. hospitals have closed up many small private hospitals that never did give a decent service The hon. member who just resumed his seat is evidence of how the people have appreciated has been looking at the matter in a one-eyed the benefit they have gained from that hos fashion. He said that the country people pital policy. The baby clinics and child are not affected at all and went on to point welfare r,entres are a splendid illustration out the high price of land in country towns. of what can be accomplished by ,wise social legislation. :lir. Collins: I did not say they were not affected at all. This Bill makes it possible but not obli gatory for a hospitals board to do something lUr. SPARI{E 8: Let me take a. fairly for the care of the old-age pensioner. That thriving country town-one you know, Mr. is an admirable step. I believe that some Chairman-the town of Dalby, with approxi hospitals boards will avail themselves of the mately 4,000 people. It pays £288, while the opportunity. I know of hospitals boards in shire of Wambo with a population of approxi my area that are very disturbed over the mately 2,000 pays £1,926. Can any hon. mem position that has arisen with respect to many ber say that is fair~ This is the point: not old-age pensioners who are not in a position only does the man on the land pay as the Hospitals Act Amendment Bill. [1 SEPTEMBER.] Hospitals Act Amendment Bill. 241 owner of land, but he pays as an ordinary of a: Government or a State to care for the taxpayer also; and if he gets sick and goes sick and the weak. That should be the into hospital he pays again, so he is taxed responsibility of every individual in a State three times. or country. That is one direction in which nationalisation should be effective so that ~Ir. Devries: Capacity to pay. anybody who is sick-- ~Ir. SPARKES: Capacity to pay! It does not matter how unjust the thing is so Tlw CHAIRIUA~: Order! long as the person has the money to pay; Mr. PLUNKETT: Anybody who cannot that is the attitude of a great many hon. care for himself should be provided for and members opposite. Following that line of contributions for his maintenance should be argument, it would seem to me that if I made by the whole of the people. This Bill is have a boy he could go to the war a'nd fight welcome as an acknowledgment from the for nothing, because he has the capacity to Government that the amount to be found by pay; and he could pay with his life in the local authorities ought to be reduced from same way. 40 per cent. to 25 per cent., but the Bill Mr. Moore: That is a ridiculous argu does not go far enough. ment; it does not apply. 'rhe Bill provides also that the aged and incurable can be provided with accommodation JUr. SPARKES: The man who owns the and medical attention in their own districts. land pays three times. The town of W arra, with Certainly, that is very wise and a step in a population of 200 does not pay as much as the right direction. To place a person suffer I do in hospital tax. Am I likely to get sick ing from an incurable disease among strangers more frequently than the 200 people in hastens death, and consequently I feel that W arra ~ If I do get sick I pay again. And I all hospitals, especially those in country areas, pay as an ordinary taxpayer. will provide accommodation for the aged and incurable. On the one hand the Government JI:r. l'\Ioo:re: Take all the people out of propose to reduce the cost to the landowners the town and you would go broke. from 40 per cent. to 25 per cent., but on the other hand make provision for this further Mr. SPARKES: If you took them all off the lam1 hon. members opposite would stane, accommodation, and consequently I venture and that would do them good. thP opinion that the 15 per cent. saving will not be one-third of the cost. On the one hand The hon. member for Cook gave me a gleam we reduce the contribution by 15 per cent., of hope when he said it was a step in the whereas on the other we give the opportunity right direction. The only thing I can hope to provide additional accommodation and is that hon. members opposite keep on stepping services tha't will impose another 50 per cent. and do the job properly. The hon. member on the landowners or the people in the parti may ha.ve some inside information that I cular area. From that aspect the reduction of have not. I hope it is in that direction. But 15 per cent. is a mere bag·atelle. It is a great as to this other argument, of going back to pity the Govemment could not go the whole 1929 and stating ·what should have been done way and place the responsibility for medical then, I do not care a cuss who was in power and nursing attention equitably on ali the in 1029 or 1930. When are we going to get people of the State. Of course, it is difficult away from continually bringing up in this to allocate the exact amount that any person Chamber what was done then~ \Ve are to-day should pay, but it is quite wrong to use the here to do a job to-clay, and not in the past. methods proposed in this Bill. A landowner, If it is not so, why call Parliament togethed merely because he is a landowner, has up to It is ridiculous in the extreme to say that the present been finding 40 per cent. of the because it was not done in 1929 it ~hould cost. not he done in 1943. I hope the Minister will I\Ir. Collins: It applies to everybody in act as suggested by the hon. member for the city who owns a home. Cook and, avoiding that appeal to the past, wipe out entirely what is obviously an Jl'Ir. PLUNKETT: The hon. member for injustice. Cook illustrated his argument by an extreme case, a quarter of an acre of land worth Mr. PLUNil:ETT (Albert) (12.13 p.m.): £5,000. How many are there who own such No-one can honestly con tend that the hospital an area of land worth such a large amount~ services throughout Queensland are not effi He also said that some farms were worth cient. W0 can justly feel proud of them in only £400. It is a pretty miserable farm that comparison with those of any other country. is worth that amount only. When the distTicting of hospitals was started, the Government took the responsibility of ~Ir. ColHns: Unimproved value. finding 60 per cent. of the cost of adminis The Secretary :i'or Health and Home tration, 40 per cent. to be found by the land Affairs: This is on local-authority valua owners. Even then they admitted that the tion, which is pretty low. taxation was not equitable inasmuch as they allocated the cost in those proportions. Of l'\Ir. PLUNRETT: I am glad to know at course, it is l1eartening to find that the Govern any rate the Government have at last realised ment now propose to make a further reduction that the system has been inequitable and that in the payment by the landowner, evidently they propose to alter it, but I suggest that realising that the imposition on him is alto they go further and provide that the cost gether inequitable. I agree with the hon. shaH be borne by the whole of the people in member for Cook that it is the responsibility the State. 242 Hospitals Act Amendment Bill. [ASSEMBLY.] Hospitals Act Amendment Bill. lllr. L. J. BARNES (Cairns) (12.19 p.m.): the period 1929-32. We are supposed to be It is a pity that the Government have not up to date in our ideas. Why then not plan decided to give a whole loaf, but half a loaf ahead and not for ever live in the past~ So is better than no bread. long as hon. members will take every oppor Last week, when speaking of the subsidy tunity to mention what was done 10 or 12 to the dairymen, the Premier said that that years ago, so long shall we live in the past. was a more equitable method of distributing \V e should not continually remark upon what the money taken from the people than an was done 10 years ago, but we should direct increase in the price of butter. This subsidy our minds towards deciding what should be to hospitals could be put in the same class. done during the next 50 or 500 years. It is a more equitable way of distributing the The Secretary for Public Lands: You taxation taken from the people. go back 50 years sometimes. Much has been said about how local authorities derive their revenue and as to Mr. J. F. BARNES: I go back only to who pays. Let us analyse the position and the time when the Labour Party adopted its see who does pay. One-third of Queensland's political platform. This Bill is intended to population is in the Greater Brisbane area. give some Telief to the local authorities and 'l'he population of Greater Brisbane together it is contended by the Government that the lrith that of the provincial towns throughout landowners are best able to bear the cost. the State, is approximately 78 per cent. of 'rhe hon. member for Cairns has already the population of Queensland. This means explained the incidence of taxation and how that 78 per cent. of the people are paying it is collected, but let me add that all taxa either directly or indirectly to local author tion is paid by the worker. The hon. mem ities for the upkerp of fwspitn ].. , in these ber for Cairns explained that a tenant paid towns and cities. If a man ·is in a rented his contribution towards hospital upkeep in house the landlord fixes such a rent as wil1 the rent for his house. That is true. Seventy include the amount he is required to pay in five per cent. of the people are workers, and rates to local authorities, and if the rates are so 75 per cent. of the people pay the taxes, increased each year up goes the rent. whether it is a hospital tax or any other. Taxation is reflected in the cost of all goods Mr. Dart: He cannot do that. and services and it is paid by the worker whether in the form of rent for a house or Mr. L. J. BARNES: He can do it in pro in the price he pays for an apple or a shirt. portion to the increase. In the business world, One of the main planks of the platform of the if a person is renting a place it is usual Labom Party is the nationalisation of to find provision in the lease that the tenant hospitals, and that is what we expect from shall pay all rates in excess of those levied the Labour Government. Here is a splendid in a specific year. Therefore, the bulk of the opportunity for them to give effect to that revenue collected by local authorities comes plank of their platform and ·where could they indirectly from the poorest people. There is have a better opportunity of taking such a no doubt that the statement by the hon. mem bold step than in the field of medicine f ber for Aubigny that certain freeholders are Hospital services have increased tremendously. overtaxed at times is true. They have not doubled or even trebled, but Much has been said about the poor men's they are four times bigger than they used l'omes, and we can see that the cost is going to be. I was born in Gympie and in the to inc.rease greatly because of such things as earliest time I remember the population of incurable diseases. For instance, cancer is that city was 33,000. To-day it is 11,500, and increasing at the rate of probably 20 or 30 the hospital is three times as big as it was per cent. a year. People are not going to in the early days. The increased cost of get old any quicker, but the increase in the maintaining these larger hospitals is passed incidence of incurable diseases will be colossal on to the local authorities, but what financial and this subsidy or saving to the local authori position will they be in if the increase in ties will be of no avail whatever. In time the hospital services and accommodation is main result will be that local authorities, instead tained at the same rate as in the past~ The local authorities or the ratepayers concerned of having less, will have more to carry. We know that it is no crime to grow old or poor, will find themselves in a worse financial posi but apparently to grow old and poor together tion than at present. Why has the size of is treated as a crime. As yet our Governments hospitals increased' One can find the answer have not done much about that. to that question simply by looking round Brisbane and other large towns. It is because The day will probably come when we shall members of Parliament are not able to legis launch a publicity campaign to teach the late in such a way as to prevent the increase. people what they should eat and drink, and we 'rhis measure, designed to relieve local autho shall then be able to deal with the causes of ritir '• will really have the effect o•f impos disease. However, that is outside the scope ing further costs on them, whereas if we of the measure. At the moment we =st be could teach the people what they should eat thankful for what we get and I am only and drink the hospitals would decrease and sorry that the Government have not decided not increase, and there would be no need for that local authorities should not be asked subsidies. to contribute to the cost of hospitals. Tile Secretary for Publ'ic Lands: Did you get sick in Bog go road f Jtr. J. F. BARNES (Bundaberg) (12.25 p.m.): I heard a previous speaker refer to JUr. J. F. BARNES: What made me sick the year 1999 and I heard another refer to in Boggo road? Hospitals Act Amendment Bill. [1 SEPTEMBER.] Hospitals Act Amendment Bill. 1143 The CHAIRMAN: Order! ciated with them. There should be two Diamantinas, one for extreme eases and the Mr. J. F. BARNES: It was the rotten other for incurable cases. Government. The Secretary for Health and Home The CHAIRMAN: Order! Affairs: When they are incurable they are extreme. :Mr. J. F. BARNES: I have given my answer, Mr. Brassington. Mr. J. :F. BARNES.: I am talking of such extreme cases as those perhaps where you The CHAIRMAN: Order! I should like have a patient with a head perhaps four to draw the hon. member's attention to the times larger than normal, or a body 10 times fact that he can discuss only the principles smaller than my own. When you go there contained in the Bill and that what he is with friends you would not like to interview now discussing is outside the principles of such cases, and likewise the patient would the Bill. not like you to interview him in such Mr. J. F. BARNES: The Bill proposes surroundings. Such sufferers would appreciate that further attention should be given to an intermediate home. They should be in persons suffering from incurable disease-an a hospital with every modern facility. It is excellent idea, and I agree with the hon. only right in these modern days that there member for Cook that it is a step in the right should be a modern institution to receive suf direction. However, it is a very poor step ferers from ordinary T.B. or cancer and thus in the right direction because we have tuber prevent them from staying around their town, culosis sufferers in our midst who are allowed drinking tea or beer as the case may be, and to drink out of the same cup or glass as any perpetuating that disease. It may be that other member of the community and thus such a modern institution cannot be financed spread their disease. It is now proposed by by the present orthodox financial system. We the Government that these sufferers should be must appreciate to what extent disease has given a home in their own area, but that is been perpetuated under that system. I not enough. The fact remains that in order realise that it cannot be coped with by to encourage people to live at a home it must o1·thodox finance but it can be by the system be made pleasant for them. The proper way of national credit. to care for sufferers from incurable disease 'l'he CHAIRJUAN: Order! is to make arrangements whereby they will not be able to spread their disease to others. ]}lr .J. l<'. BARNES: There is another That can be done by giving them every aspect of this matter and that is a nationali modern facility in these homes. We have, sation of medicine. for argument's sake, the Diamantina Hos pital. You would not ask a man suffering The CHAIRJUAN: Order! from ordinary T.B. or cancer to go and live there. Those of us who understand what the Itir. J. F. BARNES: I am not exactly in Diamantina is know it to be a home for full favour-- people who are absolutely abnormal and The CHAIR3IAN: Order! therefore are an eyesore to normal sufferers. Mr. J. F. BARNES: It could be fully con The Secretary for Health and Home trolled by the State. When I say fully con Affairs: That is absolutely rubbish. You trolled by the State I do not mean for argu have never been over the Diamantina Hos ment's sake that in a town like Bundaberg, pital or you would not say that. If you have, where normally there are six doctors, there then whnt you state is absolutely rubbish or should be six doctors there in the future. you are suffering from illusions. There should be 36. If you save one life we must admit tii.at life will produce in 20, ll'lr. J. F. BARNES: The hon. gentleman 30, or 50 years more than will compensate says that I must be suffering from illusions for the additional expense of those doctors. to make that statement. Y on know, Mr. Brassington, as well as I do The Secretary for Health and Home that if you have something wrong with your Affairs: You are. tooth when you are a youth you will not go to your dentist and have it attended to Itir. J. F. BARNES: Some of the cases because it might cost you £1 1s.; you will in the Diamantina Hospital are absolutely put it off for six or twelve months. For all we horrifying, because of malformation at birth. know persons suffering from cancer or other I am not saying that the people themselves incurable diseases to-day, well might have been are responsible for it, but it is not a place caused by putting off a visit to the dentist. By where normally incurable people should be the same token when we legislate to eliminate placed. disease we should do so along correct lines. Then we shall not be called on to pay for The Secre'tary for Health and Home building colossal hospitals as has been done Affairs: There is no institution in the world where there is a happier or better during the last few years. This is a very atmosphere than there is at the Diamantina big question. It can only be tackled by Hospital. looking forwards, not by looking backwards. The position as to incurable diseases to-day Mr. J. F. BARNES: Some of the cases in is chaotic. the Diamantina, I repeat, are such that I ask the Government not to take a quarter normally incurable cases should not be asso- of the step necessary to correct the position 244 Hospitals Act Amendment Bill. [ASSEMBLY.] Hospitals Act Amendment Bill. but to take the full step, not even to meet 1t was dropperl because it ,,·as found that it the whole cost of hospitals but to nationalise \Yould hit the fanner harder than t11e bx them. on unimproved valuation of lnncl. The SECRETARY FOR HEALTH AND lUr. JUaher: You could not impose a tax HOME AJ<'-FAIRS (Hon. E. M. Hanlon, in the JHidst of the deprc,,;ion-tlut was the Ithaca) (12.35 p.m.) : I was quite amused to m:Jin obdacle. listen to the Leader and other hon. members of the Opposition when speaking to this Bill. The SECRETARY FOR HEALTH AND They painted a very poor picture of our HOlliE AFJ<'AIRS: The hon. gentleman can farming community. Personally I am going not reasonably say that, because in the midst to take the opportunity of denying on behalf of the depression the most vicious tax ever of the decent, fair-minded farmers that the imposed was imposed by his Government. farmer is the mean, paltry individual Mr. Maher: What was it? that hon. members opposite tried to make out. The Leader of the Opposition Tile SECUETARY FOR HEALTH AND talked of the tremendous burden on the people HOME AFFAIRS: That was the unem in the Esk Shire by the imposition of what ployed relief tax. he calls the hospital tax on land. In reality the hospital service is a local government Mr. li'Iaher: Which you continued and function. In all countries in the world doubled and trebled. hospitals are conducted by local authorities, Tl1e SECRETARY FOR HEALTH AND in England in many cases entirely so. It is HOME AFFAIRS: Oh, no; the hon. gentle only in recent years, during the depression man forgets something: the unemployment period, that the national Government have relief tax was retained to maintain t/le unem come to the aid of struggling hospitals. ployed who had been brought into absolute At 12.36 p.m. penury by the actions of his Government, hut Mr. :\'[ANN (Brisbane) relieved the Chair an exemption was made when the Labour man in the chair. Government came in by reason of which the unfortunatP person who went out to do half Tl1e SECRETARY FOR HEALTH AND a clay's 1vashing was not taxed. As a matter HOlUE AFFAIRS: They were entirely of fact, as far as Yicious taxation goes, let me voluntarily conducted. 'l'he local authorities remind the hon. gentleman that they imposed concluctecl their own hospitals at their own a tax on a child who won a 10s. prize in a expense. The entire cost over and above newspaper competition. When these people income. is borne bv the rates. Some (]f the get talking a bout vicious taxation, my mind finest hospitals in ti1c world nrc now O\vnecl by flies back to those troubled days between local authorities i11 England. The hospitals 1929 and 1932. are visited by people from all over the world The point I \Vas making was that the to see what progrc·,s has been macle in Govemment of the day found that a tax hospitalisation in England. of 3d. in the £] on salarv and income would The nearest approach to our OIYH system is hit the farming community much harder than that in operation in New Zealand, where they the present system. Their own recm·ds show conduct the hospitals on the same. plan as we you that. do, that is to say, the Government come to Let us look at the dreaMul sufferings of the aid of the local government body by con the stan·ing dairy farmers of the Esk district, tributing to the cost in excess of the one of the richest districts in Queensland, receipts from patients' payments. 'l'he same if not in A ustralia-ancl I refer to our friend system of boards is in operation. 'l'hey con the hon. member for Stanley for verification sist of representatives of the Government and of that statement. In the Esk Shire this is local athorities, but the cost is borne 50 per how this terrible tax used to hit the farmer. cent. by the Government and 50 per cent. by There were 537 property-owners in the Esk the local authorities. That is the system Shire whose property was valued at under nearest to the Queensland system that I know £100, who pnid an average rate of 3s. Id. a of. There may be others that have been year. developed that I bave not yet heard of, but up to the outbreak of war that was the nearest An Opposition Member: That does not approach to the Queensland system. suggest richness. I want to point out how lightly our system The SECRETARY FOR HEALTH AND falls upon the farmers, but before doing so, HOME AFFAIRS: Wait a while. It sug I wish to refer to the fact tbat during the llests low local authority valuations. Then, period the Opposition Party were in power 210 persons own land valued at £100 to £200 they made an attempt at altering it. Some and they pay an average of lls. a year as a hon. members who arc here 110w were in the result of the provision of modern hospital House then and thev will remember that in nccommodation in their area. There are 237 the 1929 election one of the promises of the f~umers whose property is valued between Moore Party was to abolish the hospitals tax, £200 and £300, and they pay the terrible sum the charge on local authorities !for hospital of 18s. 2d. a year for a modern hospital service precepts. vVh0n they came into power the in their district, There are 167 farmers matter wm< considered and the proposl'!l was whose land is valued between £300 and £400 that the hospitals should be supported by a who pay on an average £1 6s. 2d. a year for rate of 3d. in the £1 on wages and income. modern hospital and medical service at their Ho11. members must remember that proposal. door; £1 6s. 2d. a year represents about 6d. Hospitals Act Amendment Bill. [1 SEPTEMBER.] Hospitals Act Amendment Bill. 245 a week. One thousand one hm1dred and The next group will pay £G lSs. Gd. instead eighty-seven oJ these suffering farmers in the of £10 17s. 9d., and the maximum group will Esk Shire pay Gel. a week or less to have a pay £17 17 s. 2c1. instead of £2G Ss. 2d. Even hospita 1 and mer1i~al service at their door. this wealthy organisation that pays £50 1s. ld. There are very few ba'sic-wage-earners in will come down to £33 7s. 5d. In view of these this country who would grumble at having to fi·gmes I think that the sad picture painted pay Gd. a week for that service. But let us pro by hon. members opposite falls to the dust ceed. Between £400 and £500, local-authority very hard indeed. valuation, there are 137 of these distressed 'The principle of local-authority provision farmers pay £1 13s. Gel. a year on an avera·ge. for hospitalisa:tion is not new. It is adopted Between £500 and £1,000 there are 315 whose in all modern countries. vVe have the idea of average contribution is £2 10s. 2d. That is advancing further in the direction of pre under 1s. a week. There you have 1,G39 of ventive medicine and that is to be made a thesP hrmers who are being pushed into function of the department that has charge of insolvency by having to pay under 1s. a week, the health of the people, but these things or 2d. under 1s. a' week in the year in the must come by and by. Esk Shire, and any canecutter or miner in The largest payers of hospita'l precepts of North Queensland who did not pay 1s. a local authorities are the graziers, and on the week to the hospitals would be regarded as announcement of this alteration I had a letter a scab by his mates. Hon. members opposite from the United Graziers' Association in this morning stood up and told me that the which they complimented the Government payment by those 1, G39 farmers of under 1s. quite frankly on the very generous reduction a week to maintain the hospital services is that lmcl been made to them. They quite oppressing them and causing them hardship. frankly said it 1ms a &plendid gesture to them I remind hon. members, too, that those m·e by the Government and they were very grate the old figures. I shall give the new figures ful for it. Hon. members should not think in a moment. I now come to the valuations they are getting kudos from the farmers for above £1,000. I think the L€ader of the tlw story they have told. Opposition will admit that these local authority Yaluations are not high. He would The average decent farmer wants a hospital be a·stoundecl at the figure asked for the land to-clay. He wants a decent hospital. He if he went to buy it. There are 109 struggling wants a good medical service. He realises farmers who pay £5 5s. a year. Between that he, no more than anybody else, cannot £2,000 anc1 £5,000 there arc 45 farmers who a±Iord to haYe sick or neglected people in his pay on an average £10 7s. 9d. a year. Over community. £:3,000 thc1·e are 13 landowners in the I remind hon. members that the two leading shire who pay on an average £26 Ss. 2c1. opponents to this system of hospitalisation in a year. The maximum amount paid by a tax Queensland were the chairman of the Kingaroy payer in the year to maintain the hospital Shire and Mr. Murphy, of the Bungil Shire. service, and I suppose that is a bank, is A few years ago, at the laot local authority £50 1s. 1d. A property valued at over £5,000 election but one, which was fought on this is paying £50-odd and no doubt its value issue, they both lost their seats, which shows would be a'pproximately £10,000. Such a that the country people arc not as mean as property-owner would have employees and hon. members opposite are trying to make cons-equently would have obligations to those them out to be this morning. There are employees. But it is costing him only under very few ordinary working farmers-I do not £1 a week to maintain a service without which mean the owners of farms, such as the one he would not get employees. E•mployees would who owns the farm and who takes 50 per not go to a district if that facility were not cent. of what the worker, the share-farmer, there for the safety of their wives and earns fron1 it-there are very few legitimate children. farmers in this country who are paying any We find then that only 1G7 people in the more than the average wage-earner for Esk Shire pay 1 s. or over a week, and only hospital services in the community. Further 58 people pay more tha'n 2s. a week. Does more, I do not think there are any decent not the picture painted by hon. members farmers who are mean enough to resent having opposite fall to pieces~ to pay that small contribution for this service. Now let me show what the effect of the lllr. DART (Wynnum) (12.50 p.m.): new rate that we propose to bring into opera While we on this side welcome the reduction, tion will be- we certainly believe that this tax should be The 573 who now pay 3s. 1d. will pay abolished altogether. The Minister has cited 2s. 1c1. a year. one case in this State, but many others The 210 who now pay lls. will pay 7s. 4d. could be quoted to prove that the principle a year. is wrong. He has told us of the taxation that will be levied by way of a precept, but The 237 who now pay 18s. 2d. will pay 12s. 2d. a yea·r. it must be remembered that the same men pay further taxation to the Government. If The 167 who now pay £1 6s. 2c1. (Gd. a both Government anc1 local authority moneys week) will pay 17 s. Gd. a year. are used it is obvious that the man who owns The 137 who now pay £1 13s. Gd. will pay land pays twice, and while we welcome the £1 Os. Gd. a year. reduction, we say that on principle the local The il15 who now pay £2 10s. 2d. (under 2nthorities should be exempt. Is. a week) will pay £1 13s. Gel. a Last year in the Greater Brisbane area year. £119,024 was paid by landowners tow·ards ~46 Hospitals Act Amendment Bill. [ASSEMBLY.] Hospitals Act Amendment Bill. hospital upkeep. Then, all the people who virtually idle. No property can produce live in the Brisbane area do not live in income when it is idle, but it is proposed in Queen street. '!'here are a number of hard the Bill to collect further taxation from working men who own their own homes, people whose property is perhaps giving no family men who are compelled to pay ordinary return at all. income taxation as well as to contribute towards the upkeep of hospitals. Those work lUr. Farrell: The local authorities have ing men in the Greater Brisbane area are the right to remit rates. paying Hd. in the £1 for hospital purposes. lUr. DART: In many cases they have not The working man and the business man of the that right. If a son who has been the main city should get more consideration, and in stay of the family is away at the front and amending this Act the Minister should have the property is held in the name of his father abolished the local authority precept entirely. or mother the local authority has no right to It is an imposition on the thrifty people of remit the rates on the land. If the persons the State. ThP pioneers of the State who who were ordinarily engaged in earning the own land in the country have to pay the living from the land are now at the front precept and the thrifty people in the city who the property is really a burden. That may own their own homes are required to contri not be so in the city in every case because in bute towards it in addition to paying their the city the men are working for wages, they ordinary income tax. Therefore, there is a have not been allowed to enlist or they have double imposition on both the working man not been called up for military service because and the business man in the city. they are in essential occupations. In that Later on the 2\Iinister may tell us that in case the capacity to earn has not diminished, the city area we have had a reduction of but in the country the capacity to earn has about £40.000, and no doubt that will be seriously declined because the people respon appreciated by the people, especially the sible for earning the living are serving in the basic->mge-eamer who will have to pay :)d. fighting forces. As it is impossible to get in the £1 less. blood out of a stone so it is also impossible We agree that the sick should be cared to get money out of land unless it is worked. for and that provision should be made for Consequently, if property cannot be worked the incurables. The Diamantina Hospital has a tax, whether for hospital upkeep or anything rendered magnificent service and we on this Plse, is only an imposition. The Minister side shonld like to see other sim.tiJar hospitals could amend the Act to provide that local in other areas rendering similar service to authorities shall be exempt from the payment the incurahles. \Ye must realise that no man of hospital maintenance for the duration of enters these institutions through his own the war. fault and his care should be the responsibility I commend the part of the Bill that pro of the State. It is only right that we should vides for the care of the sick and the aged consideT these people and provide for their because it gives to the pioneers and the comfort and convenience in various parts of people who had the comage to go on the land the State. \Ye do not want an influx of only what they deserve. people, especially all the sick people, to one At 2.15 p.m., city. Accommodation should be provided for them near their friends and relatives. The CHAIRMAN resumed the chair. As a member of the Opposition, I welcome Thfr. J,UCIHNS (Maree) (2.15 p.m.): Both tho provision to take care of the aged also. the Bill and amendment are designed in the Recently I have been in a number of homes. interests of the aged, infirm, and s1ck. There '!'he d;ughters have married, the sons are foro, the ohject is a budablG one. vYe all away, and no-one is left to care for the aged look nt these matters to Sf'e how we can giYe father and mother. I know quite a number the greatest benefit to the afflicted. of these old people well over 80 years of age The principle of Government sul•sidy and and some in the nineties, and I realise local-government precepts for the support of thoroughly that when people reach the ages our hospitals calls for close examination. The of 70, BO, and 90 years there must be some time is coming, and coming very rapidly, when one such as a nurse to care for them. Some our social services, including medical help to of these old people cannot take care of them those in nee(1, wm become :i national matter. selves, they cannot even elea11 themselves or \\'e can therefore visualise the time when this dress thcmsclYes as all respectable people 1ri11 be a national, not a State, concern. would like to see them do. Therefore, I we lcomc that part of the Bill which provides The CHAIRThiAN: Order! for proper care and attention for old people, hut as the GoYennnent are amending the Act Mr. LUCKINS: We are considering a they should hnve gone to the extent of proposal by the Minister for the care of the exempting local authorities both in the city aged, infirm, and sick by hospitals boards. I and the country from contributing to the ~on:iectme that the Government have in mind cost of hospital maintenance. It may be a far bigger scheme than appears on the argued that thr rate of contribution is low surf a re. ]t therefore behoYes us to make but whether it is high or low taxation should a close investigation to ~ee how the best ser he imposed in ac~ordance with the capacity ,·icc ran be given to those requiring it. It to earn. Tu the country the people are denied has been noticed with some degree of con the serYices that are usually available to them ~ternation that the Brisbane and South Coast in normnl times. For insta'nce, the young men Hospitals Board has concentrated on building are away at the front and properties are a very large but good ho,;pital in the centre Hospitals Act Amendment Bill. [l SEPTEMBER.] Hospitals Act Amendment Bill. 247 ?f this city, and has neglected altogether the for the hospitals. I believe our hospital mterests of South Brisbane. I seriously facilities in Brisbane are very good and very conn;:tend to the Minister the provision of up to date. 'rhosc who have been inmates hosp1tal accommodation at South Brisbane. of that institution haYe given good reports T _find on studying the cost of upkeep of of the treatment obtained there, but I think h(' J]ntals under the control of the Brisbane the time is fast approaching when the Govern mH1 South Coast Hospitals Board that the ment must provide the whole of the cost for Brisbane City Council, which has 110 000 the upkeep of the hospitals. It does not ratepayers, in 1933 contributed by way of matter what provision is made in England on precept to the board the sum of £37 600 a 50-50 basis; the question arises, who whereas for the year ending 30 .June, l943; is responsible~ It is not the parents of the tlus sum had grown to £119,000. As the hon. sick child or the relative of the affiicter1 adult, J;,(·mber for Sandgate wisely pointed out this but it is the Government of the State. Just eontribntion, which was an indirect ta~ on as we provirle a police force for the protection the ratepayers concerned was equivalent to of the people, so should YYe provide hospitals a rate of Hd. in the £1' on the unimproved for their protection. Whether we like it or value of property in the city of Brisbane. not, it will not be long before the Government That is a large amount. I am always pleased of the State will provide medical facilities when consideration is given to those. requiring for those requiring them. medical or health services, and I expect that I wish to pay a tribute to the work done the increased facilities provided for under in the Diaman tin a Hospital. I am sorry to this Bill will further increase the cost to the say it has been taken over by the military ratepayers of the city of Brisbane. That is authorities, who are working in conjunction a point worthy of consideration. On many \Yith the General Hospital. occasions the Opposition have argued that the Government should provide a sort of half The Secretary for Health and Home way house for the mentally sick. Affairs: We moved the Diamantina patients out of the city when there was a threat of The Secretary for Health and Home enemy action and the building is used as Affairs: There is already one in Brisbane. reserve accommodation for the Brisbane llir. LUCKINS: Yes, there is one now, General Hospital in case. of raids. but the accommodation is insufficient for those requiring attention. \V e all know that there Mr. LUCKINS: Many of the patients is a war on, and therefore I do not wish to were distributed to different parts of the State dwell on that aspect of the matter too long "~here they are receiving good attention. but it should be the policy of the Govern~ People who have aged relatives like t)wm ment to provide a half-way house. for the to be in an institution as near to their homes mental sickness that is so pronounced to-clay. I as possible so that they may keep up their am not going into the question whether such an family associations. We pay too little atten institution should be provided by an indirect tion at times to the needs of our old people tax on the ratepayers. It is an institution but I maintain that they should receive every that should be wholly provicled by the Govern attention that we can give them because they ment, which would be a full measure o•f reward are our pioneers and have done wonderful work for the general taxpayer. in this State. It is only reasonable that I want to say without going into the sub hospitals should be estabiished not only in ject of hospital taxation generally that many the city but in all parts of the metropolitan area and country districts. The General of us can recall th~ time when hospitals were supported voluntar.1ly by public subscription, Hospital to-day has vast accommodation that many people makmg a weekly contribution has been provided, not by the Government, of 6d. or ls. Those people had a direct but by the generosity of the people who buy Golden Casket tickets, which is another institu inter~st in the ~ospital because they had a vote m the selecbon of the committee to con tion that is commendable in its way. When trol it. some people buy a Casket ticket they do not think of what it will jJay but they know the The Secretary for Health and Home money is going towards hospital building. Affairs: That was not the only right they had. They also had the right to send ~o Mr. Sparkes: I do not think many look many people into the hospital. on it that way, Mr. LUCKINS: It was one of the best Mr. LUCKINS: We assume that those methods, because the Government were not who do not wish to gamble regard it as a much concerned with the management of the contribution towards hospital upkeep. hospitals. In my own home town the money to build a hospital and many other public As the Minister pointed out, a matter institutions that are there to-clay was pro affecting the basis of payment towards vided by the workers Jiving there. The drift hospital keep that is of some concern is the ~o-day seems to be in the direction of depend valuation of ratable land. He pointed out mg on somebody else to make provision for that in districts where there was a low medical services that the people are entitled valuation the landowners contributed on a to. on the. amount of taxation they pay. I very lo\\ basis, but there are districts in tlnnk the Government should handle this Queensland that are highly valued-in my matter in the intermts of the commlmitY opinion too highly valued-and they are rnv i!\'nerally .'1nd as a gesture of good wlll the~' in:! an extortionate amonnt compared with the should take over the whole of the payment amount paid by owners in other areas. 248 Hospitals Act Amendment Bill. [ASSEMBLY.] Hospitals Act Amendment Bill. The Secretary for Health and Home forward progressively since the last debate Affairs: Name any local authority in which in this Parliament on the general principles you t!,ink the ratepayers are paying an extor of hospital taxation. tionate amount and I will get you out the The Secretary for Healtll and Home same table that I took out for Esk. Affairs: We are always moving forward. Mr. LUCKINS: The hon. gentleman need ~Ir. :iliAHER: Obviously, the hon. gentle not do that. I am a valuer and a member man and those behind him relied on the very of the Commonwealth Institute of Valuers inequitable percentages applied for the pur and I know as much as the· average layman pose of obtaining funds to finance hospitals and I know the conditions in Brisbane. by local-authority precepts-namely, 40 per There were 20 local authorities in and about cent. by the local authority and 60 per cent. the city of Brisbane prior to the Greater from Government revenue. Apparently, the Brisbane scheme, and they had different constant hammering by the Opposition when methods of valuing and rating. I remember ever the opportunity arose year after year one local authority had the principle of low has at last made some impressions. Water valuing and high rating while another had dripping on a stone gradually wears it away, just the opposite. When it came to amalga and apparently the logic of the Opposition mating, the Brisbane City Council, in its over the years has at last taken effect on what wisdom, having no facilities for valuing the ever remnants of justice remain in the mind whole of the Brisbane area, as was required of the hon. gentleman. to be done under the law, adopted the valua As the hon. member for 11aree has sug tions then prevailing. The city of South gested, however, there is, apparently, a catch Brisbane had a svstem of low valuation and in the Minister's propotml to reduce the con high rating wher"eas the town of Hamilton tribution from local authorities from 40 to 25 had the opposite. "\Vas the 11recept paid on per cent., in the sense that the hon. gentleman an equal basis by those t\Vo areas? I think darkly hinted that very ~oon steps would be not. vV e have the statement of the Secretary taken to rectify the alleged inequity ea us ell for Health and Home Affairs that that evil by the fact that some lor ci authority valua would be remedied, and I expect the Govern tions are said to be too lo 1.·. ment will introduce a Bill establishing a In other words, the Minister feels, deep valuer-general's department to consolidate down in his heart, that not enough taxes arc ancl re\ alue the \vhole of the ratable land being collected through precepts on the in the State. farmers and landowners in general. He hints S0cretary for Hoolt11 and Home i hnt early steps will be taken to rectify : We have been considering that for this position so that there will be a bigger yea.rs. gathci"ing of taxes from those who have to meet the inequitable levies of to-day. ~I.r. :LUCKINS: If it is the intention to hase taxation for hospital and social services There are only two practicable approaches on land valuations, the day is fast approach to an equitable solution of hospital financing, ing when such a valuation must be made as in my opinion. One is the straightout hospital low as possible, because the incidence of taxa tax levied upon all. I suppose that would be tion is getting high. the fairest method. It is recognised gener ally that every person in the community The Secre-tary for Health and Home should, in times of prosperity, contribute to Affairs: Not necessarily low; as equitable the maintenance of a hospital that, in Rs possible. infirmity or ill-health, he might wish to enter. lUr. LUCKINS: I mean having the lowest I see no objection to the principle of the possible taxation in that direction. There straightout hospital tax upon all receivers are many who desire to live in their own of income in the State. To apply such a homes and not exchange them for a cash principle under to-day's conditions of war value. 'rhey desire to live in a particular would, of course, be absolutely impracticable, district hut should the locality appear to be ,just as the recommendation of the Royal developing some local authorities have the Commission on Hospitals in 1930 to levy a tax idea, or they had prior to the passing of the upon all salary and income was not practic r~ocal Government Act, which pegged valua able at the time owing to the depression and tious for five years, of increasing the valuation the need of the Government of the dav to every two or three years until precepts for introduce the unemployment relief tax. That hospital services have increased to such an tax was referred to by the Secretary for extent that it becomes very unwise to impose Health and Home Affairs as being vicious, further taxation. I have drawn attention to but it provided aid for many people the fact that the precept of the Brisbane ,-ho were hadly in need of it at that City Council increased from £37,000 in 1933 time. It was so vicious that the Minister to £119,000 at the end of June. It is a and his Government continued it until taxa question when and 'vhere that sort of thing tion was taken over bv the Federal Govern will stop. Citizens can pay too much by way ment recently. In fact, as I interjected this of taxation through local authorities for hos morning, thev doubled and trebled the amount pital maintenance, considering that they have that was rec.eived from that source, although al,oo to pay A. E. Moore was Premier of Queensland. The the sick and the needy. Thev are escaping times '"ere not appropriate for the imposition their citizen obligation to j'my something of taxation of that kind any more than the towards the upkeep of hospitals. Therefore, I heavy taxation that is being borne by all sec contpnd the system to-day is incq uitable, but tions of the community to-day would permit the Government are grac1ually moving towards of the imposition of a straightout hospital the objective of suspending paYments by local tax. authorities altogether in that they are willing The only other method that seems to me to to increase the contribution from State be at all practicable is what is known as the revenue from 60 per cent. to 75 per cent. nationalisation of hospitals. Already hos That is all right so long as there is no inten pitals have been nationalised in point of con tion to offset that benefit by the imposition of an extra burden upon the local authorities. trol. Therefore, it is only a short step to their complete nationalisation in the matter The Minister said that the Bill provided of financA. The Government a.re moving that the cost of caring for incumble, infirm, steadily towards that objective, and no doubt and aged people could be imposed upon the they ,\-ill attain it. It is better, I think, to local authorities in the district in which they relieve the people of the local-government lived. In fact, if I understood him correctly, precepts and to allow the revenue of the he envisaged a scheme whereby . ~istri~t State to bear the full cost than perpetuate the hospitals would have to make prov1sl0n m inequity of the present system. There is building space and extra waTds to meet such come justification for financing hospitals a situation. ~While relief to the extent of from 'income-tax sources, but there is 15 per cent. is acceptable under normal. cond~ no .iustification for simply hitting a man tions, it is not a very great amount 1f th1s nr because he is a landowner and impos extra burden has to be borne by the local ing a tax upon his land. Some of those land authorities. From the official returns I have owners, the smaller men, may be in very poor extracted figures that indicate that the circumstances, and the question whether their Ipswich Hospitals Board received £11,000 by earnings are low or high is not taken into way of precepts over the last financial year. consideration; the precept comes in. The }"ifteen per cent. off that precept would Minister has quoted cases and stated that in amount to £1,650. Therefore, I take it that the shire of Esk there were small farmers based on last year's figures, thtJ Ipswich with unimproved land to the value of £100. Hospitals Board-- All I can say is that' the:· would be mighty small farmers, indeed; in fact, I am inclined The Secretary :i'or Health and Home to think that the Minister is confusing with Affairs: That is bad arithmetic again. It the farmers allotment-owners in the town of is roughly a reduction by one-third. Esk or some of the villages in the Esk Shire. Mr. MAHER: One-third of the total pre It is my experience that a fa'rm in the Lowood and Esk districts with an unimproved cept~ valuation of £100 is a very poor type of farm The Secretary for Health and Home indeed, and when the Minister quotes the Affairs: It is not a reduction of 15 per luclicronslv low amount of taxation collected cent. in the precept paid, but 15 per cent. off by way of precepts from these farmers he the 40 per cent. does not give a fair picture of the situation at all. Mr. :~'IAHER: I understand that now, and that seems a better proposal than I first had The Secretary !or Health and Home in mind. Affairs: There is a difference in the value of land when it is returned for taxation The Secretary for Health and Home purposes and when a man is trying to sell it. Affairs: Previously, the Government paid £1 J Os. for every £1 paid by the loc::~l JUr. liAHER: One has to take human authority, but under the Bill the Government nature into account, and if the Minister were will pay £3 for every £1 pa:id by the local a farmer he would probably try to adjust authority. hinbrlf to the taxation gales that blow. Whether the amount is high or small, how l\Ir. lUAHER: That is a reduction of ever, that is not the test. The real point approximately 33 per cent. lies in the inequity of calling upon one section The Secretary l'or Healtll and Home of the community to bear the burden of Affairs: About that. hospital finance, while allowing others, fre quently in receipt of high incomes, to escape JUr. MAHER: I did not understand it in a fair contribution towards the cost of that way in the beginning and it certainly hospital maintenance. It has been repeated improves the position beyond that which I time and again that in large provincial cities have worked out here, At the same time, the like Ipswich, Toowoomba, Roma, Mary local authorities are to be called upon to bmough, Cairns, Rockhampton, 'rownsville, undertake extra financial responsibilities in and so on throughout the State, there are men increasing the number of buildings, and in who do not own any land, but who are in giving room to be used in the care of aged, receipt of substantial incomes, such as incurable, and infirm people. Obviously, that banisters. solicitors, stm·ekecpers com1ucting is going to be an additional financial strain busincs 'f' on lensed property, ancl public upon the people. An interesting point a.rises officers in receipt of high snlnrics, all of here. 'I should like to ask the Minister whethe! whom should have the obligation to contri district hospitals will be compelled to cater bute to The Secretary for Health and Home ~fr. Sparkes: Generous like the Federal Affairs: It is purely an enabling measure. Government subsidy to the butter producers -give them £1 and take £2 away. lUr. MAHER: What becomes of the aged and infirm in Dunwich and the Eventide The CHAIRMAN: Order! Home, Charters Towers~ Will it mean that if a resident of, say, the Rosewood district I\Ir. ThlAHER: The local-authority rate moves into Dunwich, the cost of his mainten notices do not provide for any indication ance there can be a charge on the local of the exact amount of the hospital precept authmity at Rosewood ~ payable by each ratepayer. This is a point that has been debated in the Chamber on The Secretary for Health' and Home previous occasions when we urged on the Affairs: No, nothing of that kind. Minister the acceptance of an amendment providing that a separate rate should be ltfr. MAHER: That is not proposed? struck and sent to every individual taxpayer in the area showing the precise amount he The Secretary for Health and Home was obliged to pay by way of hospitals pre Affairs: No. cept as distinct from the general rate he pays for the construction and maintenancie of ltir, ThiAHER: At any rate, it just depends roads, &c. on what the Minister has in his mind. That is very difficult to forecast. I should say As the Minister has never been able to give that there are a great number of aged people any sound reason why that principle should in every hospital area. There are certainly not be applied, we can only come to the con a great number of old-age pensioners and clusion that he has something to hide; that people who have incurable diseases in each he does not want to disclose to the individual hospital district, and if the onus of their farmer the actual amount he is called upon to maintenance is thrust upon the local hospitals pay by way of precept for fear the farmer board it will call upon the local authorities "-ould begin to ask questions and object to by way of precept to :finance them. If that these sizeable amounts he was obliged to pay is so, then what the Minister gives out with to meet the precept tor hospital maintenance one hand superficially so generously to-day to the local authority. might actually prove in practice to be a Tile Attorney-General: Each hospitals heavy burden, as no advantage will be derived board submits precepts, not the Minister. from his generosity. There is the fly in the ointment. It is a question of just how far I\Ir. JIAHER: The Minister is responsible these extra charges are going to prove costly for the governing principle, and in this case to the local authorities and the hospitals the hospitals board does not send a separate boards. I take it a provision of that kind notice to each ratepayer, nor does the shire is not inserted idly and that the Government clerk. The ratepayer receives his general rate mean business. They intend that hospitals notice in which the hospital precept is covered ?oards shal~ make provision for the aged, up in a general rate, therefore, no farmer tax m:firm, and mcurable people within a hospital payer knows exactly how much he is contri area. buting towards the hospital precept. Why not clear up the situation~ When the Local The Attorney-General: They may make Government Bill was before the House the it. Minister went to great pains to emphasise 'L'1le Premier: Not "shall." that the greatest clarity was needed in respect of the different accoU11ts covered by the Mr. ItiAHER: What is the use of that Budget. Provision was made for a separate provision m1less the Government have it at loan account, a separate general account, and the back of their minds that it will be a separate trust fund account, for the sake of mandatory at some future time~ That is the clarity. I think that is a good principle. whole picture as I see it. I fear that there Why not recognise the principle that there is a very big black nigger in this woodpile, should be the greatest amount of clarity to and that now on the eve of an election the the man who is called upon to pay the Government will go to the farming communi precept, and allow him to know the amount ties and say, ''Well, we have eased your of his precept~ If I am dealing with the burden; we have given you a substantial Brisbane City Council I want to know how rebate in the hospital precept you have been much water rates I am paying; I do not called upon to meet.'' They will however want it covered up in the general rate. I obscure from the vie>v of the farn~er by th~ want to know how much I pay for electric use of the word ''may'' in this Bill the light; I do not want it covered up in the extra burden that can be imposed on him general rate so that I have no idea what I once the election is over, and with the finan am paying for those specific utilities. So it cial responsibility for the maintenance of all is with the farmer; he desires to know how the aged, in:finn, and decrepit people in his much he is paying by way of precept to area, the charge on the farmer by way of mnintain the hospital and how much he is precept to meet these added burdens in the paying to :finance the revenues of the shire futuro will be far greater than the relief council. Why should we not have the utmost given to him. \Ve have to scrutinise this Bill clarity in this thing~ If the Minister can carefully to make sure whether the proposals justify the hospital precept there is no need of the Government are quite so generous as to cover it up by the method that is in opera the Minister in his introductory remarks would tion, yet that is what he is doing. I am lcacl us to bclieYo. sa tis:fied it is the fear that he cannot justify Hospitals Act Amendment Bill. [1 SEPTEMBER.] Hospitals Act Amendment Bill. 251 it that makes him cover it up. I think it is rate notice. What is the reason why the time for us to look into this aspect of the Government will not agree to this amendment~ matter again. For that reason I move the It was moved on a previous occasion and it following amendment to the motion:- is moved again to-day in order to clarify the position so that it will be perfectly clear ' '.'..r1d to the question the word~- to all ratepayers. I ventme the opinion that ' including a provision that every local there would not be an outcry from the allot authority rate notice shall show ment-holders. The figmes quoted by the hon. separately the amount payable on gentleman this morning of 2s. or 3s. a year is ac.,ount of a precept under the Hos not much, nor the amount for farmers with a pitals Act.' '' valuation of £100, but there will not be very If the Minister accepts that reasonable many farms in the Esk Shire with such a low amendment it will be a source of satisfaction valuation. to the people who have to pay these precepts. The Secretary for Health and Home It will give the precept payer an opportunity Affairs: There are not too many with a to know just how much he is contributing to large valuation. the maintenance of the local hospital; and I think lw is entitled to know that. l\Ir. NICKLIN: On the figures quoted (Time expired.) this morning, a number pay a fairly con siderable sum. Moreover, there are local lUr. NICKLIN (Murrumba) (:1.57 p.m.) : authorities in Queensland that pay a higher I support the amendment moved by the hon. rate in the £1 for hospital precept than member for IN est More ton. It is reasonable, the Esk Shire. The amendment provides that and I cannot understand the Minister's the amount of hospital precept should be refusing a similar amendment at the time the shown separately on the rate notice, and that Hospitals Act was going through this House is how most members of local authorities in 1936. At the present time, local-authority desire it to be. It is only fair that the rate rate notices set out details of the amounts payers should know exactly how the amounts to be collected for the various activities, such they are paying are being disbursed. as general purposes, loans, main roads, water, and other things of that kind. Why should The SECRETARY FOR HEALTH AND not rate notices show also the amount being HOME AFFAIRS (Hon. E. M. Hanlon, paid by the ratepayer on account of hospital Ithaca) (3.2 p.m.): The proposal of the hon. precepts~ If the amount is as small as member, in view of the small amount that is was suggested by the figures quoted by the paid, might be well worth while were it not hon. gentleman this morning, there is nothing for saddling local authorities with unnecessary to be frightened of; but I am very much work and expense. This is not the time to afraid that the Minister thinks that if it is tell local authorities to do extra work to pro shown separately on the notice there will be a vide information that very few people want. greater outcry than there is at present. Being Mr. Maher: It could all be dissected on included in the general rate it is cloaked and the one rate notice. ratepayers have no idea how much they are paying for hospital maintenance. The SECRETARY FOR HEALTH AND HOME AFI<'AIRS: It would take time and Mr. Duns tan: They can ask the shire labour. The table I took the figmes quoted derk. this morning from was produced at the Local Th'Ir. NICKLIN: I am sure it would not Authorities' Conference in 1940 to show be very popular with shire clerks to have all exactly how light the burden was on the the ratepayers interviewing them personally farmers. They were amazed. They did not to ascertain how much they were paying for realise it. That table took weeks and months hospitals. uf \York by sPveral clerks. On it appear the number, the group, the The Secretary for Health and Home valuation of £100, and over, of all holdings in Affairs: Any ratepayer knows from his every shire in Queensland and the number valuation. of each group, the rate they paid, and so on. lUr. Dunstan: The hon. member for I do not think the average farmer is quite Aubigny knows. as stupid and ignorant as the hon. member for West ::\J:oreton tries to make out. The Mr. NICKLIN: It just happens that he average farmer reads the local paper, and is chairman of the shire council. every year, when hospita 1 precepts are received by the shire, the amount of the pre The Secretary for Health and Home cept is given and the rate in the £1 is Affairs: The ratepayer knows what his pu blishec1. Each fanner kno\YS what h1s valuation is and knows the rate in the dis valuation is and it is on l1is rate notice. If trict. The hon. member for Maree has just his valuation is £500, and the hospital rate Btated what the rate is in Brisbane. Every is 1d. in the £1-which it is in only very body seems to know. few shires-is it not obvious that t!1e hospital payment is five times Ss. 4r1. 0 The average 3Ir. NICKLIN: I venture the opinion farmer can do that simple piece of arithmetic that there are very few who know what amount of the general rates they pay go to quite easily. ho_spital precepts. There is no reason why The point is that none uf the farmers growl thiS should be concealed. If there is nothing about it at all. I have been to all the hospitals to be aohamed of, it should be shown on the in the State. I do not think anybody who 252 Hospitals Act Amendment Bill. [ASSEMBLY.] Hospitals Act Amendment Bill. has ever been a member of this Assembly )lon. member for Fassifern, who was loafing has gone round the hospitals of this State on them, is hurt. He got hurt when the more than I have. I meet the members of Hospitals Act was brought into operation. hospitals boards, the local authority members, He had to pay his fair share. the public, the inmates, and many people who That is the situation that has arisen in are big ratepayers in those areas, and I do Queensland, and wherever I go opening not get any growl or complaints about this hospitals and so on, I have stated repeatedly, matter from t)lem. It is only in this Chamber I have offered to t·ell anyone who complained that we get these complaints. All I can say of the hospital charge on his rates )low much is that the hon. gentleman must associate with he paid, if he would tell me his valuation. No some pretty mean people. The people who one wanted to know. They kno"· how much do get hit heavily by the hospital rate are they pay. The larger property-holders, the the grazing community, and, as I told the employers of a large amount of labour, have Committee -this morning, the United Graziers' to meet a large share of it, and they are not Assoeiation was very appreciative of ,,-hat complaining because, by propaganda an<1 "·as being done, and has not complained at experienee, they have become conve1·sant with all. the \York the hospital organisation of this Wherever I go, I find that once local author State is doing. 'l'hey are realising that they ity representatives have been on hospitals cannot keep decent people in the pastm:al in boards they nre eager for the progress of dustry unless they make provision for decent the hospital, and they cease to complain about people to live. They realise that they will nny cost that may be involved. Only in very not get good men to follow the pastoral indus rare cases indeed do they complain. try until there is decent accommodation for One of the aTeas in which the hospital rate tl!eir "·ives and children. hits the local authorities heavily is the Charle These are the things that will make li,fe ville area. The graziers there were up in sufficiently attractive in the country to keep anns about the proposal to bl'ing the Charle decent workers there. I do not blame any ville hospital under the district scheme and country worker who cleared mvay to the city make the Mnnvch Shire eontribute towards it. from the conditions that used to exist in the 'fhey protested about the ]1eavy valuations country districts, but experience has l-'roved and small populntion, and so on. However, that a modern hospital service is an excellent the Government districted the hospita) and investment for those districts and brings its two members of the 1Iurweh council became own returns. members of the board. -When I was out there recently to see about some improvements they ~Ir. Mal! er: All that the tough Westerner 1Yantcc1, then~ were no t"·o men on the board required was rum and kerosene, one for who were more eager to build, extend, equip intenml use and the other for external use. and improve than those two representat1ves of the 1Iurwrh Shire, who were graziers them Tlle SECRETARY FOR HEALTH AND HOlUE AFFAIRS: If that were so to-day, selYrs. Association with hospital work and the they would be in a bad way because both responsibility for doing the work gave them those eommodities are in particularly short an interest in the economics and principles supply at the moment and so there would be of health work, and it was no time until that heavy mortality amongst them. It \Yould not shiTe was providing wa tcr supplies for small do hon. members opposite any good if the towns like l\forven and Augathella, making Government placed this additional ,,-ork on street improvements, planting shade tr!)es in shire clerks, because it would only bring under the streets, and so on, because those men the notice of the great bulk of landholders in became interested in the health and welfare the country the story that I have just. related. of the community. At the present time, the rate for hosp1tal pur I remember driving with the chairman of poses in tllP Esk Shire is 1.1 I :'I <1.-or about -the Mnrweh Shire across-country to Auga ld. in the £1-and there would be very few thella. \Ve passed through a grid on a certain people who could not afford to pay the rate property and llC said to me, ''Every time I go of ld. in the £1. Thev all know their eon through this grid now I get a thrill of h·ibution to the hospital services and they can pleasure.'' I said, ''How is that~'' He do it simply by multiplying ld. by the number said, ''The bird who lives here is worth'' of pounds in the valuation of their properties. he named some immense amount o1f money I do not think the farmers are as stupid and '' and we were lucky if "·e got £1 out of him as dull as hon. members opposite suggest they for the hospital in the old days. Now he are. In Brisbane, the rate is 1.3:)cl. in the £1. pays about three times as much as I do.'' The allotment on v'hich I live is valued at 'He I know what hon. members opposite have i.n The ratepayers in the metropolitan area mind; they have no desire to enlighten the provide medical services for the people of farmer on the point. When the Hospitals the whole of this State. Hon. members on Act was first introduced by a previous Labour both sides know that difficult cases are Government, I think at the hands of the then brought from every part of Queensland to Home Secretary, the late J ames Stopford, cer Brisbane andi are treated in Brisbane, the tain local authorities, actuated by a desire to cost being borne by the mtepayers of Bris injure the Labour Government and the hos bane and the Brisbane and South Coast pitals scheme, to which they were opposed, Hospitals Board. Yet we havr no complaint sent out rate notices in which the health mte from the Brisbane taxpayers about it. They and hospital rate were grouped in an endeav are not going to whine about a few pounds our to mislead the people into believing that of expenditure for emergency services under that was the amount they were paying in hos our hospitals system. The Deputy Leader of pital tax alone, as they called it. That head the Opposition is not serious in moving this ing included the cost of health services, sani amendment and in that case I cannot accept tary services, and cleansing services. It was it. a dishonourable attempt to persuade the Mr. DECKER (Sandgate) (3.17 p.m.): I farmers to believe that those were the charges support the amendment. I do not agree with they were called upon to meet under the new the Minister that the ratepayers know what Hospitals Act. I do not think that hon. mem they are paying in hospital taxation. I found bers opposite want to reinstitute such a dis they did not know. It is not so easily com hone~t scheme of trying to mislead the people puted as the Minister would have us believe. into believing that they are paying more for I knoZY, as he said, that is a matter of simple their hospital services than they really arc. arithmetic, of multiplying 100 by 1.35d., but It is an easy matter for any landholder to I challenge the hon. member to tell us what work out what he pays towards the support the basis of the rate is in the £1. The only of his hospital. That information is readily way it can be done is by knowing the amount available to him. Any hon. member in this of the hospital precept and the total amount Chamber can get it for him at any moment. of the rates and making a calculation on If any ratepayer in Queensland wants to that basis. I know as an ex-alderman of the know what he is paying, he can get it from council that no-one in Brisbane could tell me his local-authority representative, from his what he is paying in hospital taxation even parliamentary representative, or he can write if he knows his \'aluation anrl the amount of to the department for it. the hospital precept. He would not know what his share of the hospital tax was until lir.• J. F. Barnes: Why should he be he went deeply into the question \Yith thP town obliged to do that~ clerk or accountant. The SECRETARY FOR HEALTH AND The reason is that the precepts are not the only charge that Brisbane citizens pay in HO~IE A'Ft'AIRS: Why should someone be obliged to do it for him 9 I do not accept rates. the idea that the hon. member for West The Secretary for Health and Home Moreton or the Leader of the Opposition Affairs: Are you serious? have the right to speak for all the people in the community. Mr. nECKER: The Brisbane City Council is called on to maintain the Infectious Mr. :iUuller: Why are they here? Diseases Hospital at \Vattlebrae. I challenge the Minister to tell me what the Brisbane The SECRETARY FOR HEALTH ANn City Council is paying in the £1 in hospital HO}IE AFFAIRS: I think I represent more rates. people than either of them and I have the right to speak for them. Nobody in my The Secretary for Health and Home electorate has worried me about his hospital Affairs: I have just told you. rate. Probably the people living in my elec torate pay more towards the cost of hospitals Mr. DECKER: No, that is the precept. than anybody in any of the shires quoted by The Minister told us that we could arrive at the Leader of the Opposition. I do not hear the amount by multiplying the value of the them whining. I have never heard in recent property at the rate in the £1 h7 l,3.)d., \Yhich years of any protest from the Chamber of would be the hospital precept, but I am pomt Manufactures, the Chamber Df Commerce, or ing out that that figure does not include the the Taxpayers' Association. Probably the eost of maintaining Wattlebme. That cost Bank of New South Wales, Finney Isles and \vould not be available to the Minister with Company Limited, or the '' Couricr-:\1ail'' pay out specific inquiry and some research. more towards the hospital costs than any land The Secretary :for Health and Home owner in this State outside the city area. At Affairs: You have only to ring up the one time they used to complain, but when the Town Clerk to get it. new hospitals scheme came in they ceased to complain because they realised what a wonder :filr. DECKER: The ratepayers all over ful thing it was for the community to have the State do not know what they are paying a modern hospital and maternity service, in hospital precepts and the only wn:v to give tin:llH·t''1 in ru·,·ur,l:nh t'" ,,·ith the nbilitv of the them that knowledge is for the local authority people to make the contributions. I have had to show it on the rate notices just as they no protest from such people in the city since show general rate and water rate. The I have been in office. gcnernf rntc embraces charges of which the 254 Hospitals Act Amendment Bill. [ASSEMBLY.] Hospitals Act Amendment Bill. average ratepayer has no idea unless he does The Secretary for Health and Home some research. It would help the Brisbane Affairs: If you get the property valuation, City Council to overcome many of its diffi in 15 seconds we will give you your ra'te. cultie~ to inform the ratepayers what propor tion of the general rate goes in hospital lUr. MULLER: Why should anybody have rates. That is due to the people. We try to come and ask what his contribution to the to tell them at election time, but the issue is hospital is. There is no reason why he should. confused by the introduction of other issues. You might as wen say you ought not to give The people therefore remain confused from him the amounts he contributed to the con one election to another, because these parti struction of main roads or to the loan fund, culars are not definite. It would not be very which are shown in the rate notices each year. difficult to give them. It would be a simple What is wrong with that~ There is no real matter to calculate the rate as part of the reason why the thing should be covered up. general rate and as it would be an advantage If our deeds are clean we do not object to to have it specified I support the amendment. the world's looking at them. There must be some reason for covering the thing up. 'What Mr. ~fULLER (Fassifern) (3.20 p.m.) : is the reason~ The Minister has talked about The Minister made a great attempt to avoid m·erything under the sun. He said that the the principle in the amendment. If it is people in the city did not object and the big right for the local authority when striking graziers did not object. The reason why they the various rates to set out a definite rate for do not object is that they are tired of lodging the various services rendered, whether it be protests. They have objected repeatedly. The general rate, water rate, cleansing rate, main thing is unfa'ir and inequitable. I ask again: roarls rate, or loan rate, it is also right if this thing is clean and there is no reason that it should show what is being charged why we should not show it, why can we not for hospital services. I served about 15 years be open about it~ The hon. member for on a local authority. E was not optional \Vest Moreton puts it clearly in this amend but mandatory for the council to show the ment that the contribution shall be stated. rates struck for the different services. In The :\Tinister has replied that you can go to fact, the law will not allow you to collect the derk and get it. outstanding rates unless it is shown that the 'l'lle Secretary for Health and Home rate was legally struc.k. Affairs: That is not my reply-that he What is the justification for the discrimina could go to the clerk and get it. tion in connection with the hospital rate~ The local authority has even to shike a loan Mr. MULLER: I think it was the rate which may be one-sixth of a pennv hnt Attorney-General who said he could go to the it is obliged to do so under the law~' My clerk and get it. The fact remains that the point is that the local authority is obliged inequity is there. The amonnt is not shown to show that rate separately. Now we ask and nobody has told the Committee why it the local authority to provide the money for should not be shown. If it is a clean deed the maintenance of hospitals and try to get why is it not shown~ away -;·ith a scheme of this kind. It permits a hosprtals board to say to a local authority M.r. J. F. BARNES (Bundaberg) (3.25 ''We require £2,000; it will be a charge o~ p.m.): This debate reminds me of something the general rate,'' without showing what the that has been happening for a long time under separate amounts are. the Liquor Act, since 8 o'clock closing was introduced, although in this case it is the I submit this is a: very dangerous procedure. reverse of what happened there. After 8 You do not know where it is going to end. o'clock closing the gentleman's agreement Recently we had a spectacle of a number of told the people they could drink after hospitals boards showing surpluses because 8 o'clock. Here the Government charge they did not spend much money in' improve them for hospital tax and will not tell mmlts. That money is pnt into a special fund them what it is. If a man pays he and it is local-authority money. is entitled to know how much he is paying, A Government Member: It is hospitals but for some mysterious reason he is not boards' money. told on this occasion how much he is paying. 'l'he previous speaker has insinuated that there lUr. MULLER: You can call it hospitals is some reason why the Government have not boards'. money if. yon like. They may have done so. There can be no other reason, ~2,000 m. the hosprtal this year and they may haning the fact that there are a number of mcrease rt to £3,000 and they could have a farmers and property-holders who are Labour surplus of £10,000 or £20,000 and the local people and the Government do not want to let authority has no redress. ·where is this going them know how much they pay in these to end~ The man who foots the bill is hospital taxes. There can be no other reason. entitlPd to know what contribution he is 'f;hat is the only reason they are hiding it. I makin;-:- on tlw unimp1·oyed vnhw of his lnnd. have had farmers come to me and ask me what The Minister knows that what I sav is true they were paying and I said to them, ''You and ha's approved of their action in putting can search me; I do not know.'' When they by a special fund. If everything is as rosy are paying they have the right to know how as th~ :\IiJ;ister maintains, what is wrong ·with much they are paying. The Government hav·e showmg rU I am not afraid to tell the no right to hide it. It is a lasting disgrace world anything I have done-and I fpeJ the and is camouflage to deceive the people and it Minister is not-but why this attempt to should not be allowed to happen. The amend cover up the amount of hospital rate~ ment will prove it and I will support it. Hospitals Act Amendment Bill. [1 SEI'TEMBER.] Hospitals Act Amendment Bill. 255 Mr. YEATES (East Toowoomba) (3.27 Bowen hospitals were concerned, especially tlJe p.m.): I support the amendment. When we one in which he was interested, was the dis receive our mte notices they show general tl·icting of hospitals by the Government. 1\Ir. rate so much and water ra'te so much. Cunningham paid as much in hospital preeept I want to know why this hospitals rate can ns the whole o concerned about the Country Party, which has hospital services should be paid by the Govern lost its significance. As a matter of fact ment, and that such services should be free it has been long proved that they are th~ to the people. vVe must remember that those people who represent the big vested interests who are unfortunate enough to have to go to of the country. Hon. members opposite do hospital do so mainly as a result of living not speak for the farmers, they speak only for under the existing system. Industry or work, the big vested interests, and that is clear or an attempt to earn their living compels from the fact that when Arty J<'adden took them to do so. As industry uses them for them under his wing the partv split and lost profit only they should be a charge on its identity. • industry. Thm·efore, I maintain the Govern The Bill is a splendid one. To hear the ment should meet the whole cost of hospitals arguments of hon. meml>ers opposite, the and that these institutions should give their upostles of the new thought as they set them services free. It is no use pleading that selves up to be, one would think that they had money enters i11to the subject, because the taken the place of the Labour Government in Premier has told us that this war has opened their advocacy of the socialisation of industry. his eyes in the matter of obtaining finance. They want nationalisation of hospitals, but If he had his eyes opened to such an extent do they want nationalisation of industry or that he now understands national finance, it banking or nationalisation of all those things is the duty of the Government to finance our that the Labour Party has advocated down hospitals service. Immediately accommoda through the ages? l'Y o. When the i11terests tion and attention at hospitals are absolutely of the big people are affected they talk free then we shall have to bring our doctors about nationalisation or socialisation but not under the same category. \Vhen a student at any other t_ime. However, the people in passes out of the University, which is some the country Will speak for themselves and thing owned by the State, as a medical practi whe1~ it comes to passing judgment o;1 the tioner, he will become the servant of the State hospital precept they will speak as they and work for the benefit of the people. spoke at the last Federal election. A peculiar position arises in relation to old-age pensioners and this Bill seeks to JUr. YEATES (East Toowoomba) (3.43 make some provision for them. I do not Jl.m.): I was very much surprised to hear the know how many buildings have been erected ho;1. membcT_ for my native city say the throughout Queensland in furtherance of this thmgs he did, and I am extremely dis appointed in him. Of course I shall have to war effort. Surely some use can be made of some of these buil