Special Hearings — Health Sector Hearings — 1997-06-18

EDWARD BARKER: I think this part of the history is very important in an understanding of where MASA was in those days and how it came to be that it did the things it did and failed to do the things it should have done.  There was a very strong leadership, there was close association between the top leadership of the Medical Association, the - can I say the establishment certainly a close association between the MASA leadership of the SANDC and without any doubt in my own mind I'm convinced that there was close association, certainly with various structures in the government and certainly with people in the government on a very personal basis.  Now the leadership at that time, I believe, felt, were told, felt for themselves that if these doctors were to be found guilty it would create such a furore for the Health Department and for the Government itself, for the Security Police, for everything that it had to be damped down and smoothed over as effectively as possible.
 Now there was a huge outcry and as you say you've read the journals, there were letters from all the provinces, from all the branches, lots and lots and an enormous amount of correspondence received by the journal which has only now this month been published, a whole lot which was not published by the journal, load of letters and the then Chairman of Council undertook a whistle-stop tour of all the branches in the country, he addressed them all making an impassioned plea to the membership please to support that they couldn't possibly question the integrity of people on the Medical Council. It was unthinkable that doctors of that standing could remotely have their integrity impugned, which was these wild people writing these subversive letters were trying to do.
 He managed to convince meetings held at every branch to express support for the position of the then MASA executive with one exception, he came to the Natal Coastal Branch and this was the only branch in the country that refused to accept his plea that while he was there, rejected, passed a resolution rejecting first of all dissociating itself from the SAMDC finding and rejecting the action of the executive in approving this, demanding that the executive in fact altered its stance, and this was basically an explanation of what was going on then.

UNKNOWN: Mr Chairman I'd just like to add something to it.  The specific reaction at the end of the day and what the Federal Council did, and this was in the early days when I had become a Federal Council then was the special meeting of the Federal Council which was held on the 12th of November 1980 to discuss these issues and what the reaction of the Federal Council was going to be to the outcry of which Dr Barker speaks.  There was a considerable debate and one must also remember that there were four members of that Federal Council who were also members of the Medical and Dental Council at that particular time, one of whom was the chairman of the Council too, and they paid considerable attention to what those councillors, the members of the Medical Council had to say at the meeting of the Federal Council.  There's no doubt whatsoever that the Federal Council was attempting to avoid a direct confrontation with the South African Medical and Dental Council for the major reason and that was the destruction of the Medical Association itself, if they had adopted a policy at that stage of condemning the Medical Council.  They didn't face up to it, and I was one of them at that particular time, didn't face up to the reality of this.  Each one of the members of that Federal Council represented a branch, it was purely at that particular time branch representation.  They represented the interests of those particular branches and as we rightly have here, the outcry came from certain branches, but at the other branches they wished to maintain the status quo and not upset anything that might have happened, whether it was government inspired or whether it was the Council itself.  They did not take that action, they found a compromise, what they believed was a compromise to examine detention, to examine children in detention, and that was as far as they were prepared to go to accept some committee which would examine these issues rather than face the possible destruction of the Association.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, my last question and then I'll hand over to my colleagues and it's to do with racism.  It was only in 1994 that you finally made a decision on separatist rooms that doctors had for examining patients.  What has the Organisation done since then?   Because I'm sure none of us will disagree that racism still remains within our society, what has the Organisation done to eradicate racism and to what position would the Organisation take today if it was brought to your notice that some of your members was still practising in this fashion?

EDWARD BARKER: Mr Chairman could I just go back a little bit before 1994, from 1990, at that time the then Minister of Health set up quarterly meetings with the executive of the Association that later became the Board of Trustees and at every one of these meetings the Medical Association Executive brought forward its demand to the then Minister of Health for the abolition of the fragmented Health Services, the abolition of the 14 Ministries of Health and their unification on the one hand, and on the other for the opening of all hospitals to all races, the abolition of the racially separate nature of State hospitals.  That was our position from 1990 onwards and a demand which we made repeatedly and it was only finally acceded to by Minister Venter I think in about 1993, that she finally conceded and the hospitals throughout the Republic were open to all races.   I think our stance today would be unequivocal rejection, and I really don't believe that we could maintain, within our membership, people who overtly and clearly were practising in a racist way.  I don't think that this could be conceivable particularly in the light of our move towards unity with the entire profession in the country.

CHAIRPERSON: Over to my colleagues. Pumla.

MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA: Thank you Chairperson.  Gentlemen I really find your comments, the forthrightness, the frankness and openness very refreshing.  I think that you have very clearly illustrated what the evil system of apartheid did to many of the structures that were supposed to be promoting health in our society did not do, and I really appreciate that openness that you have demonstrated.
 My question to you is about the South African Medical Society, SAMS in the military.  Did MASA have a relationship with the South African Medical Services in the military and if so, what was the nature of this relationship?

EDWARD BARKER: I am unaware of any but I could ask my colleagues.  I'm not aware of any formal structured relationship with SAMS.

UNKNOWN: That's quite correct, we didn't have a formal structured relationship other than the odd invitation to a military dinner ...(intervention)

MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA: ...hobnobbing with the military.

HENDRIK ANDRIES HANEKOM: That's correct yes, but no other specific formal relationship.  Probably what you're leading up to say is, why didn't we examine that relationship and try and find out whether there was any discrimination there in any way?

MS GOBODO-MADIKIZELA: Not so much questions of discrimination but really from the point of view of the medical profession being custodian of all medical ethics and medical practice in the country, I would assume or would have assumed that you were the sort of guardians of those kinds of organisations.  So I'm surprised to hear that in fact you did not have any relationship.