The ERYPCT Board today passed unanimously the following


The Board was asked to:   Note the robust analytical process that each option has been subjected to in the development of the Investment Case

Approve the findings of the Investment Case appraisal that the preferred option should be Option C(i) a), which is founded upon introduction of neighbourhood health teams across the East Riding, development of Level 2 services at Bridlington, Goole and Beverley, and retention of Withernsea as an additional bedded unit.

Note that existing services will continue as usual, with further clarification of implementational processes and timelines to be submitted to the Board by November 2007  

Approve development of a full business case based on the preferred option with presentation back to a future Board meeting  

Approve further development and submission of a prioritised set of capital business cases based upon the preferred option to the Strategic Health Authority by 9th July 2007  

Note that an assessment of the Elective and Diagnostic Services component will be presented to the Board by September 2007

The new appearance of Beverley in the options was expanded in the 'prioritised set of capital business cases' to show that the PCT has/will apply for funding to build a 30-bedded community hospital, with ancillary services, on a new site in Beverley.  The audience believed (although this was not admitted) that the new appearance of Withernsea amongst the favoured was because it is a PFI contract, which would be very expensive to leave, and that the private sector had refused to take over Withernsea as not being viable for them (they apparently require 40 beds).

Hornsea might get an expanded health centre, and Driffield likewise, neither to have beds, depending on successful capital bids.  West Wolds might get an expanded health centre too. Bridlington to have 23 beds, Withernsea 12, Beverley 30, Goole 15 (at present none), and the independent sector 15, in unspecified places.   Total 95 beds.

There would a 30-40% increase in staff for community health teams, at a cost of £6 million, an option that had surprisingly jumped to the top of the list.  These would be teams of nurses, social services staff and therapists, supported by 'additional specialist' and GPs. In reply to questions, it was not sure where these team members would come from; some would be unqualified staff who would be 'retrained' on the job. These mobile teams would deal with urgent care and minor injuries.

What do I think?

We must be pleased that Beverley, which last year was not to have a hospital at all, is now to have a state of the art brand new one - where, we were not told.  I asked why not refurbish the old hospital? And was told that the site was not big enough, as the PCT wanted to join with Mental Health in offering services on the same site.  So it seems that the PCT intends to give up the whole of the Westwood site, if it can get  the money, and then I suppose clamour for a green field site elsewhere (I am told that Swinemoor is one of the options). Personally I think this is stupid, and a waste of our money.

We must be displeased that so much of what people wanted, has been ignored.  The option C, when offered, did not suggest that neighbourhood health teams (a renaming of virtual wards, which Claire Wood said were not understood) were to take precedence over, and replace, the community hospitals, and of course if that had been in the consultation, it would have been rejected by 99% of the respondents. We must feel deep sympathy with Hornsea and Driffield, whose reps. were outraged.  We must be very puzzled that Goole still features (it refers people on to Scunthorpe) and Bridlington, which is in dire straits with closures imposed by Scarborough.  And why private beds, instead of either Hornsea or Driffield?  Why allow the private sector in at all (it doesn't seem to want this role).  Neither Bridlington nor Goole were represented at the meeting.

The Board meeting was better than the last, in that there were microphones and a shorter agenda.  The vital papers however were only released the day before the Board, and as last time, the decision was taken before the public were allowed to speak.  We endured an interminable powerpoint, where Duncan Ross read through his overheads. The 30 mins. public time was reduced to about 6 questions by the grossly biased chairman, who closed down questions smartly, while allowing interminable answers from the Board members.  Few people attended, as there had been no publicity, and without the papers, and the way the meeting was run, it was largely a wasted morning.

What would people like to do next?  Hornsea and Driffield will be looking for a review of the decisions, which has made the consultation, and all the hours we have spent, a farce. By tomorrow we will have a new PM and a new Sec. of State for Health, and with luck, more sense at the top!

Story No2 26/06/07 Scarborough NHS Healthcare Trust Public Board Meeting

Maternity decision is deferred

HEALTH bosses have put off a key decision to transfer maternity services from three community hospitals to Scarborough Hospital. The delay follows arguments at a meeting of Scarborough and North East Yorkshire Healthcare Trust that the consultation process had been flawed

They were also warned that if the decision to close the units at Malton, Whitby and Bridlington had been given the go-ahead yesterday then critics would demand an independent review by the Secretary of State for Health.

Members of the trust said the recommendations had been put forward to improve the quality and safety of the service and denied they were solely to save £400,000.

They agreed to defer their decision for four weeks to allow more consultations to take place with key stakeholders such as North Yorkshire County Council and Scarborough Council.

Cllr John Blackie, chairman of the county's overview and scrutiny health committee, said the trust had “completely and utterly and totally disregarded” what people felt and that the consultations were flawed.

“The suspicion of local people is that Scarborough Hospital is being bolstered at the expense of the local community hospitals,” he said.

Iain McInnes, chief executive of the trust, pointed out that some people might define “local” as a distance of 20 miles from their hospital, but the Department of Health regarded it as 72 miles.

He also indicated that the Government wanted maternity services to deliver a much larger number of babies at any one place.

Chairman Sir Michael Carlisle said they had tried to view the matter sincerely and in a balanced way in the interests of midwifery services in the area. Mick Pilling Chairman: Save Bridlington Hospital Campaign Action Group I Attended this meeting and put my points over in no uncertain terms regarding Maternity Services & Cardiac Moniting Unit; I made it quite clear that I did not support the views of the Scarborough NHS Healthcare Trust and stated; I thought these changes were nothing more than a cost saving excercise which the Trust refuted; I stated that all services should remain at Bridlington Hospital for the future; further more I fully supported; Cllr John Blackie, chairman of the county's overview and scrutiny health committee and second him.  Mick Pilling's Headline: Maternity Service Problems/Stories:

Mum gives birth in lay-by – with help from dad; Whitby.


A WHITBY mother was forced to give birth in a lay-by becau-se she did not have enough time to get to Scarborough Hospital. Dec 2006/Early Jan 2007 4 Births in backs of ambulances - Bridlington - "How many more"??

Fury at hospital over birth 'fiasco'

ANGRY .... Sharron and Dean Morris who are to complain to Scarborough Hospital about its care during the birth of their son
A COUPLE, whose baby was delivered at Scarborough hospital, described their experience as a complete "fiasco". 08/06/2007 Sharron and Dean Morris' son Michael was born healthy, but the couple say a shortage of midwives led to a delivery which was both frightening and stressful.

Taking our NHS back, not forwards

THE heart of our NHS is the doctors and nurses, not tier upon tier of management structure which mismanage their finances and then punish the public and staff of the hospital with cutbacks and closures of wards. That is not justice seen to be done, it is the top cats putting themselves first and the people's NHS last.
The Trust says the maternity units in Whitby, Malton and Bridlington are not viable or safe...this is utter and complete rubbish; it is nothing more than a cost saving excercise to reduce the Trust debt we firmly believe.

Mick Pilling

Story Update 29/06/07

To: Mr Pilling,
From Chris Smith Town Clerk; 

I refer to your e-mail regarding the PCT's board meeting at Cottingham yesterday.

You state that neither Bridlington or Goole was represented. I would be grateful if you could publish a retraction of this statement as I attended on behalf of the Mayor, who had a long-standing civic engagement in his diary, to represent the Bridlington Town Council. I appologise for the wrong information which was sent to me; the meeting was attended by Bridlington; I should have checked the facts...Mick.P

It was not all doom and gloom for Driffield and Hornsea as the PCT is planning to invest in both of these facilities with a substantial refurbishment of the Alfred Bean Hospital and the rebuilding of the Hornsea War Memorial Hospital.

Bridlington's 23 beds is good news when one compares the 'Do Minimum' option of 14 beds for the resort's hospital.

Option C (i) a) will mean an additional £5.208M of investment for the Riding

Christopher S Smith
Town Clerk
Bridlington Town Council
4-6 Victoria Road
Bridlington
YO15 2BW
Tel: (01262) 409006
Fax: (01262) 409039
[email protected]
www.bridlington.gov.uk


back