Ann Westmore: So did that extend to informal gatherings as well? Were you friendly with him outside of meetings?

Henry Atkinson: It may be difficult for you to understand the situation. Arthur Amies was Principal of the Australian College of Dentistry, Dean of the Dental Hospital and Dean of the Faculty. He had, what’s the expression, a thimble and the pea trick.

He had great influence on all the committees and he was very influential in the community at large. We grew up in that atmosphere, that both College and Hospital were virtually the same and the Faculty was on the periphery. We went to the Faculty when we needed a bit of extra support from the University.

People on the Hospital Council (at various times also known as the Hospital Committee) were senior people in the professional and political life of Victoria. For example, Haddon Storey was Minister for the Arts at one stage; Sir William Anderson[86] had been the Secretary of the Shell Company and President of the Conservative Society; there was a leading architect, one of the namesakes of the firm of Arthur Andersen and Company, Accountants. It was a very close-knit, well-informed group and they could get things done, directly and otherwise.

Ann Westmore: How did ‘Pansy’ Wright get on with Arthur Amies?

Henry Atkinson: ‘Pansy’ had been a very close friend of Arthur’s because they were students together at one time or other. But at some stage in their careers, ‘Pansy’ left Arthur behind.[87] They had a falling out, a disagreement. But ‘Pansy’ was always very supportive of the academic side.

Garry Pearson: Can I pick up on another angle - something Mike referred to earlier - about the connection between the School and the [Human Services] Department. There have been projects at various times that resulted in action plans and strategies.

One that struck me that had a direct connection with the School was the appointment of Jane Chalmers, in a Professor/Director role.[88] It was something that bridged the need for development of special needs teaching and, in fact, having a special needs unit with a few more resources attached to it within the Hospital. This gerodontology action plan and strategy was an example of a very direct benefit into the School from that kind of community activity.

John Rogers: The Department developed a geriatric dentistry action plan out of a well-funded research project run by a combined Dental Hospital, Dental Health Services Victoria[89] and University of Melbourne team. In that case, the University and the Dental Hospital, through Dental Health Services Victoria, worked with the Department representatives and developed a policy position which had the support of those players and the Australian Dental Association. From that, funding for a specialist in the Department’s Special Needs Unit was made available. The former Dean of the Dental Faculty, Clive Wright, who was then working for Dental Health Services Victoria, was quite important in ensuring that there was agreement between the various parties. It was a good example of where the University, the Hospital and the Department worked together in a broad area of public health, which is geriatric dentistry.

Ann Westmore: Did Clive Wright move from a position at the School and join the Department?

John Rogers: He went through a period of private practice in New Zealand then he came back to a role with the organisation, Dental Health Services Victoria, which manages the Dental Hospital. So he wasn’t employed by the Department as such.

Ann Westmore: Are there other examples of that strong linkage between the Department and the other players you mentioned?

John Rogers: From my experience since the early 1990s, there are a number of examples of co-operative endeavour. As Mike said, Professor Louise Brearley Messer was employed in the Elsdon Storey Chair of Child Dental Health, which was funded by the University and by the [Health] Department and with a contribution from Dental Health Services Victoria of 10% for five years. There are examples of major committees such as the fluoridation committee, which had representation from the Australian Dental Association, the School, the Hospital and Dental Health Services Victoria. There was also the research that’s been mentioned

I’m trying not to be too Polyanna-ish about this. I’m thinking of areas where there have been differences. Certainly around the construction of the new Hospital there was some lively discussion about how big is big enough, and how many clinics and Chairs there should be, given that everyone except the funder wants it to be bigger. There were also some tense times about the role that the University would have in the new building which is different from the arrangement in the old building. It was a share title previously, and in this building the University is considered a tenant.

Mike Morgan: As is the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology.

Witness to the History of Australian Medicine