The deadline looms
"I am surprised there is resistance to our donating a fairly large amount of money for the construction of a new hospital which can only benefit the members of the Zoroastrian community," wrote donor Jal Shroff of Hong Kong to the president of The B. D. Petit Parsee General Hospital (PGH) on October 22, 2018. He expressed the "substantial amount of grief," he and wife Pervin felt at the opposition to their magnanimous gift (USD 22.5 million or Rs 160 crores) and noted that "our offer is valid till March 31, 2019," after which they would "withdraw our commitment."
His proposal could be the last chance the loss making Hospital that serves the disadvantaged and needy has of survival. The PGH suffered an operating loss of Rs 13.8 crores for the year ending March 2017. Of the 2,149 patients treated, 37% were free or subsidized (they comprised 57.26% of the occupied bed days). As the Parsi numbers shrink and community members move away from south Bombay, the number of paying patients continues to decline. Due to the small numbers, the Hospital cannot afford the capital and running costs of advanced, state-of-the-art equipment required to diagnose and treat certain ailments. This in turn drives patients to other better equipped facilities. It’s a vicious circle and the Shroffs’ plan was to build a cosmopolitan hospital in the PGH complex from whose turnover the PGH would be subsidized.
A handful objected. They claimed the PGH trust deed specified the land and structures built thereon were for Parsis only. But as it is many non-Parsi staff, nurses and workers reside in the complex. And the Memorandum of Association and Rules and Regulations dated November 14, 1922 clearly states PGH can "do all other things which may be incidental, subsidiary or conducive to the primary object" and also to "acquire, deal with and dispose of all property movable and immovable including the right to take and give leases, to erect, improve and demolish buildings."
With these sweeping powers the Hospital’s management would appear to be within their legal rights to enter into a management contract with the Gurgaon based Medanta Group (Global Health Pvt Ltd) to run the proposed "Shroff Medical Centre of the Bomanji Petit Parsee General Hospital." So why the opposition, personal attacks and the questioning of the donors’ intentions? A hospital is bound to have disgruntled patients and their relatives and friends. Witness the number of incidents in the media of aggrieved family members and others vandalizing — even torching — hospitals and assaulting doctors, nurses and others. Mercifully this has not happened in community institutions. But the resentment lingers. Some may bear a grudge against the trustees or management for a variety of reasons.
But in an independent survey conducted by Yazdi Tantra’s software firm On-Lyne, 85% or so of the respondents favored the new hospital being set up.
Dissent is a way of life and is essential in a democracy. We judge an institution on how aptly it deals with dissenters. One of the best counter measures is transparency. Here one can fault not only the PGH management but nearly all Parsi institutions, barring a few such as Dinshaw Tamboly’s WZO (World Zoroastrian Organisation) Trust Funds.
The PGH issued a press release regarding the opposition to their proposal only when the donors served an ultimatum. PGH’s attitude was "We are doing the right thing. We are serving the poor. We don’t need to go out and curry favor. Our work speaks for itself." All of which is true. But trustees are selected/elected/nominated to serve the beneficiaries. They are duty bound to keep the public informed. Doing so is a duty, an obligation, not a matter of discretion. Trustees may withhold certain information if they think it necessary for a time but it should not become the norm.
The Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) is a prime example of a community institution that tends to the disadvantaged but lacks transparency. It is in the news for all the wrong reasons, especially when things go wrong or the trustees’ vituperative emails to each other are leaked on social media or to the Press. Donations to the body are negligible. While other trusts like PGH and WZO run on generous donations, the BPP struggles to raise money for the Gamadia Boys’ Hostel or the rundown Godavara Agiary.
In the case of the PGH, one is witnessing the anguish caused to the donor who with all worthy intentions gave the single largest donation ever to a community institution. The Shroffs could have gifted the amount to charitable causes in Hong Kong itself or mainland China or funded a dar-e-meher in the United States of America or Australia. But they chose Bombay and the sick and needy. They reached out to assist the weakest and most vulnerable section of the community. Few can afford hospitalization in hygienic, competent, clean and well maintained environs. The rest have to rely on insurance or their savings or family, friends and lastly, trusts. One reads of appeals in the media where lakhs of rupees are required to save a life, fit prosthetic legs, transplant an organ... All this is beyond the means of the middle class. As one ages, insurance companies refuse to increase the amount of cover. A few lakhs today will not suffice to meet the cost of a major illness or surgery.
That is why one understands the hurt the Shroffs feel. Even if gratitude is lacking, surely no one expects criticism. In any scheme, things can go wrong. But in this case, the donor, the PGH management and the custodian trustees of the property, the BPP have examined the possible pitfalls and included safeguards. The critics’ objections have been studied and preventive measures initiated. All that could possibly be asked for, has been done.
If the opposition proceeds to move the courts, the PGH management will take them on. But time is running out and the courts are clogged with cases. Dissent is meaningful to a point. Beyond that it often proves destructive. One has only to view the Parsi Lying-In Hospital to know what a determined opposition can do to an institution.
The one-time maternity hospital has ceased to function since the last 25 years. A plan to start an orthopedic state-of-the-art hospital with a certain number of free or subsidized beds for Parsis was challenged in various courts. The prospective promoter lost interest and withdrew. The one-time maternity hospital now stands desolate.