Free Hospitals

And

Fiji Racial Claims

SUVA, June 1 THE Government of Fiji has had second thoughts on its proposed hospital fees for everyone who can pay. The whole question has now been referred to a general com mittee.

At present, all Fijians and all Indians receive free treatment at hospitals and dispensaries but of recent years the cost of the Colony’s medical services has soared alarm ingly, and it appeared desirable that a curb be put upon it.

Free medical treatment for Fijians and Indians goes back into history. It was the Fijians who

provided the original provincial

hospital system which became in corporated in the general medical services of the Colony and they have ever since received free services as their right. Few people would agree that this privilege should now be taken from them.

Back in the days of Indian inden tured labour, every Indian who had resided three years in the Colony had the right to free treatment, and

this benefit is still extended to any and every Indian with the same residential qualifications.

A large part of the increase in the cost of medical services has gone for the benefit of the Indians who by weight of numbers alone have caused the system to burst at the seams. A large number of these In dians who receive free treatment are well able to pay for it—but this has not prevented the Indian community, as a whole, from protesting fiercely against the proposal to limit free medical benefits.

The proposed fees for an in patient were from 30/- a day for a single-bed private ward to 2/- per day for a bed in a general ward and it was stated that they would be paid only by those able to meet them. It was proposed to leave it to the medical officer in charge to decide who could pay and who could not. Most medical officers have as much on their hands as they can cops with, however, without this added burden.

Last year, applications were called from people of irreproachable character who could speak both Hindustani and Fijian for the posi tions of hospital almoners. Nothing was heard of a rush of applicants or subsequent appointments, so appar ently it was proposed that the

business of poking about into patients' financial resources should be pushed off onto the medical officers.

AFTER a spate of Indian political meetings and general agitation against the dropping of free hospital treatment for virtually all Indians, as well as Fijians, the five Indian mem bers of Legislative Council were

prepared for a battle at the recent session on the lines of those over the Immigration Bill (which went through in 1947) and the Liquor Bill (which got stuck and was finally abandoned).

The attitude of the European members was not known in advance, but it was clear to most people that

the outcome was in the hands of the five Fijian members.

From the moment when the Fijian members started hitting hard and justifying Fijian claims in the matter of medical services, it was plain that the Bill would be passed only if the Government forced it through by its official majority in the

Council.

Two European elected members, Mr. H. Maurice Scott and Sir Alport Barker, said bluntly that the Fijian statement of the Fijians’ case had caused them to reverse their decision to support the whole principle of the Bill. Sir Alport moved an amend ment proposing that the Fijians should continue to be exempt from hospital charges.

AT this point came the surprising Indian claim that to let the Fijians off would be another form of “racial discrimination.” No—the Indians must have free treatment; and in case anybody got ideas about “discrimination” the Europeans could have it too.

Up rose Sir Alport with some warmth. “Every year,” he said, “we vote £35,000 for destitutes. But the Fijians support their own destitutes and they receive no share of the £35,000. That alone should entitle the Fijians to free medical treat ment. The hospitals were built with the Fijians’ money, and when they were taken over by the Government the Fijians were not paid a penny in recompense. If they are now to pay for hospital treatment the cost of the hospitals ought to be refunded to them.”

Sir Alport maintained that free

medical treatment for the Fijians was no more “discrimination” than was the vote of £35,000 for non-Fijian destitutes.

“If the Indians want free medical treatment they must say how the revenue is to be made up,” said Sir Alport, and added that the Indian speakers had carefully refrained from mentioning income tax.

A FIJIAN member, Joeii K. Ravai, said that if revenue were needed he would propose a tax of 10/- a ton on copra and sugar—plus “a thorough checking of the incomes of those shopkeepers and tailors who give no receipts to their customers.”

No Indian comment was made on these suggestions although Mr.

Vishnu Deo later replied to Sir Alport’s contention that most of the income tax revenue came from the European companies with a state ment that the European companies’ profits came from the Indians and Fijians!

Ratu Tiale Vuiyasawa opposed the Government’s proposals because under them the hardest-hit section would be the Fijians, and par ticularly the Fijian villagers. These people, he said, had hardly any money left after meeting their commit ments. He added: “If money is needed, tax luxuries like liquor and tobacco, and raise the entertainment tax.”

“From the little they earn,” said loeli Ravai, “the Fijians have to help to maintain the villages, the tikina !organised village groups) and the provinces. They have to meet the nbligations of Fijian custom as well as maintain their families . . . The Fijians not only maintain their own destitutes unaided, but they provide ;ransport and food for Assistant Vledical Practitioners on duty tours, and in some provinces the Fijians are still building quarters for the \MP’s. Although they do not pay n cash for medical treatment they pay in services.” [VfORE than one Fijian speaker stressed that hospital charges vould inevitably open the door to a eturn to primitive medical practices and witchcraft.

Making his maiden speech in the Council, Ratu George Cakobau, who, n rank, is the highest of all Fijian Chiefs, said that while he regretted hat on this occasion he had to appose the Government, he felt justi ied because opposition was in the aest interests of the Fijian people.

“From the arrival of the early nissionaries the Fijian people have aeen accustomed to receive European

(Continued on Page 74)

medicines free of charge,” he said. ‘To many Fijians the receiving of free medical treatment is bound up wi;h the Deed of Cession. The time is not yet ripe to remove this system.

To do so would be to cause undue hardship to a great many of our people.”

Mr. Scott described the Medical and Education Departments, with their increasing demands due to the rising population, as “bottomless pits.” Unless expenditure were curbed, he said, Fiji was heading for disaster. He added: “As a gesture of goodwill and gratitude for living in this Colony, the Europeans and Indians should agree that the system of free treat ment for the Fijians should continue.

With this reservation 1 strongly support the principle that those who can pay should pay.”

UNEASY memories of a red-hot outbreak of Fijian anger in 1949 were recalled when Mr. Scott com mented acidly: “I once heard an Indian member say that the Indians would ‘carry the Fijians on their backs until the Fijians were able to walk." I hope the present Indian members will want to share the bur den and support the amendment exempting the Fijians.”

“Racial discrimination!” said Mr.

Tulsi Ram Sharma.

“In the right direction!” retorted Mr. Scott.

No vote was taken at the end of the debate which, said the Acting Governor (Mr. A. F. R. Stoddart), had served a very useful purpose.

He said that the general committee would take note of the rising costs and consider how they were to be met. It would also consider whether the present charges should be varied and who should pay. There would be a consultation with the leaders of each group of unofficial members (European, Fijian and Indian) before the committee’s full terms of reference were decided.

This debate is likely to be a land mark in Fiji’s political history. The Fijian reaction was astonishing. And much of that reaction started with the unvocal masses, whom a Council member, Ravuama Vunivalu, des cribed as “the silent people—the or dinary men and women.” He said that the Government’s plan was seen by the Fijians as the removal of a privilege which for historical reasons they have come to regard as a birth right. They—even the people in the