Posts Tagged ‘hospital’
The Deerplay children’s ward has been earmarked for closure since 2006. It is due to close within the next few weeks. Arrangements have already been made for staff to move to Blackburn.
But campaigners are claiming that the move violates new rules introduced when the coalition government took office, and want it stopped.
Gordon Birtwistle, Burnley’s new MP, said that the closure had to be stopped because it does not have the support of the area’s GP’s.
The new NHS rules require that proposals “demonstrate support from GP commissioners”(1). The MP says that nearly all the letters he has received from GPs are objecting to the proposals, and only one has written in favour.(2)
Mr Birtwistle said, “When I was elected, people expected me to do something about the hospital, and I have. The new government introduced new rules to ensure that changes like this can only go ahead when they have the support of the area’s GPs. This closure does not have the support of GPs, so it has to be stopped.
“We met Mike Farrar, the regional NHS chief, to explain this to him ourselves. It was a difficult meeting. I cannot understand why the NHS management are still ignoring our evidence, so I am holding several meetings with ministers to ensure this is made clear to them from the top down.”
Coun Darren Reynolds, Burnley’s Health Scrutiny councillor, also attended the meeting. Coun Reynolds said, “I worry that the only way to give Burnley people the facilities we deserve is with directly elected health boards. These are a Lib Dem policy that is in the Coalition Agreement, but so far there is no sign of the Government implementing them.
“At first the NHS management wouldn’t accept that our letters represented a majority of GPs. We said to them, if we can prove that a majority of GPs object to the closure, will you accept that it has to be stopped?
“They said no, because the changes affect the whole of East Lancashire, not just Burnley.
“So we asked them whether letters from the GPs in the whole of East Lancashire would be enough, and they still said no, because the letters were about the Children’s Ward. The closure is only part of a wider programme of linked changes called, ‘Meeting Patients Needs’.
“The letters would need to consider the whole programme, they said, including Burnley’s new maternity unit.
“So we asked them whether letters from all the GPs about the whole of the Meeting Patients Needs programme would be enough, and they still said no.
“They said that the public had voted for the closure and they had to take that into account.
“At this point I’m afraid we became rather angry. The official consultation in 2006 gave the public a choice of closure or closure. To say this amounts to a vote for closure is a blatant misrepresentation.”
Mr Birtwistle was due to ask the Health Secretary Andrew Lansley about the GP rules this afternoon and will meet Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg about the matter this evening
Local Campaigner Gordon Birtwistle has hit out at plans to close Burnley hospital children’s ward and transfer most services transferred to Blackburn.
Inpatient beds will be moved to Blackburn by the end of the year. Whilst children with minor illnesses will still be treated in Burnley, anyone requiring an overnight stay will have to go to Blackburn.
Gordon said: “What we will have is a new maternity facility, but no children’s ward or paediatricians. If that is the case then the lunatics really are running the asylum.
“This is totally unacceptable. We will fight tooth and nail to prevent this happening. It’s a death by a thousand cuts and this is the latest cut in the death throes of Burnley General Hospital.
“Parents will be facing a round trip of over 20 miles to visit their sick children, and those without a car will have to struggle with public transport.
“The people who have dreamed this up should resign and have their places taken by people who understand what is needed in Burnley.”
Local health bosses have been ordered by the Government to make £50 million worth of cuts over the next three years, which they have described as the most severe they have experienced.
“It may prove that only extra money will permit Burnley to have its own facilities. If so, then the government needs to respond. Burnley people and their local representatives will always prioritise public health over illegal foreign wars, useless ID cards and disastrous defence procurement projects. This money must be spent instead on helping people to stay fit and healthy, and that is what we expect our government to do.”
Now is the time for local hospital bosses to hold a truly independent inquiry into the closure of Burnley’s A&E unit.
“We now have a new Chair and Chief Executive of the local hospitals trust”, said local campaigner Gordon Birtwistle. “Now they can start to undo the mistakes made in recent years.”
The Trust’s new chief executive is also the Chief Exec for two successful A&Es in Halifax and Huddersfield. These serve two towns closer together and with a smaller population than Burnley and Blackburn and show that it is possible to have an effective solution with two A&E units.
Gordon led the fight against the Labour government’s plans to shut Burnley’s A&E unit and recently presented a petition signed by over 9000 local people calling for it to be re-opened.
We have been asked by the Labour Party to clarify the statement in the first paragraph of the above story.
Labour-run Burnley Council decided in January 2006 to introduce charges for the collection of bulky waste. At that time they voted to introduce a charge of £10 per collection (£11.75 including VAT) with plans for it to rise to £15 (£17.62 including VAT) for the 2007/8 financial year.
This policy was followed when the 2007/8 budget was set (Labour at this point had been voted out of running Burnley Council by local people)
There was an inflationary increase of 1.8% under the Lib Dems to £17.95 for the financial year 2008/9. As the article above makes clear the Lib Dem-run Council has since reduced this charge to the current £11.75 (inc VAT) which is well below the level intended by the previous Labour administration.
The opening paragraph has been redrafted to make this clearer. For transparency it is recorded that it originally read “Liberal Democrats on Burnley Council are demanding an end to the £17.95 charges introduced by the previous Labour executive for collecting bulky items.”
We are happy to provide this clarification.
|
Liberal Democrat parliamentary candidate Coun Gordon Birtwistle is demanding the re-opening of Burnley’s Accident and Emergency after discovering that the new East Lancs hospitals chief executive believes that two A&Es are needed even for a smaller population than that supported by just one A&E in East Lancashire.
And Burnley Council is set to pass a motion making its own demands at its next meeting. Led by the Lib Dems, the Council will insist that the decision to close the Burnley service be re-examined by outside experts, repeating the calls made by both Burnley and Pendle councils in February 2008, and echoing calls made recently by former hospital governors Ian Woolley and Peter Pike. The moves follow the delivery of petitions by Coun Birtwistle to the hospitals trust and to NHS East Lancashire containing a total of over 15,000 signatures. But incoming hospitals chair and former Labour County Council leader Hazel Harding said, “The Trust does not share the view that a further independent external assessment of emergency care is necessary. A further external assessment will not be commissioned by the Trust.”
The trust that manages Burnley and Blackburn hospitals has both a new chair and chief executive, and the Lib Dems believe this represents the best opportunity to get the A&E re-opened that Burnley is likely to have for several years.
|
|
|
Lib Dem parliamentary candidate Coun Gordon Birtwistle said, “The new chair and chief executive were not part of the decision to close Burnley to emergencies. They bear no responsibility for it. There is no reason for them to insist on keeping it closed and they have nothing to lose by ordering a review of the decision.
|
|
|
“The new chief executive also runs hospitals at Halifax and Huddersfield. Both these hospitals have an A&E but they are just 5.2 miles apart, much closer together than Burnley and Blackburn. These Yorkshire hospitals have no trouble meeting the A&E waiting time targets, the books are balanced and a national audit said these hospitals had the best probable survival outcomes for patients suffering major trauma, by which they mean things like traffic accidents.
“Burnley should have what Huddersfield has – the best outcomes for patients.
“The new chair needs to be bold and to meet the aspirations of the people who both pay for and use the service. She must not let herself be hoodwinked by what remains of the old management at the Trust.”
The Trust’s new chief executive splits her time between East Lancashire and the Halifax and Huddersfield areas.
Former trust governor and fellow Lib Dem Coun Darren Reynolds added, “The hospitals at Halifax and Huddersfield provide two A&Es for a population of around 435,000 people, but in East Lancs we have a single Emergency Department for over half a million people.
“It’s not just Halifax and Huddersfield that do better. Chorley and Royal Preston hospitals both offer an Accident and Emergency department. They are less than 14 miles apart, less than the distance between Burnley and Blackburn hospitals. The Chorley and Preston hospitals only cover 370,000 people, less than two thirds of the number of people in East Lancs.
“No-one is suggesting that these other areas would do better if one of their A&Es were shut.
“It is perfectly obvious to me that Burnley was downgraded for financial reasons. Board meeting minutes show that having an A&E at Burnley was not thought viable because it was too expensive. There are two reasons for that.
“One is poor management at the Trust. The breast cancer scandal does nothing to improve public confidence in the trust management, nor does the money wasted on the scrapped Foundation Trust bid, which should never have been started.
“The other reason is that we have a government that continues to prioritise killing people in foreign countries over saving people here. How can it be right to spend billions on new nuclear missiles when our own hospitals aren’t up to scratch?”
“This is unfair on Burnley. We’ve just as much right to the best health care as anywhere else in the country.
“But none of this can be blamed on either the new chair or the new chief executive. If they can get a grip of the situation and turn things around, the people of Burnley will be delighted.”
|
|


