Press Release from Independents to Save Queen Mary's Hospital
Location of Feedback Event condemned
John Hemming-Clark, Party Leader for Independents to Save Queen Mary's Hospital has condemned the decision to hold the APoH Feedback Event in Greenwich.
He said, "It's as if the APoH bureaucrats, in holding the event in the middle of a University campus in Greenwich, wanted to make the event as inaccessible to those who are the most affected by the planned closures, i.e., the poor, the elderly and the sick, as well as being as far away as possible. What's wrong with Bexley or Bromley? I have written to the APoH SRO, Simon Robbins to ask for an explanation."
A copy of the full letter follows:
Mr S Robbins, SRO – A Picture of Health
Chief Executive, Bromley PCT
3RD Floor
1 Lower Marsh
LONDON SE1 7NT
28th May 2008
Dear Mr Robbins
You may be aware that at the beginning of this month I stood in the GLA elections in the Bromley and Bexley Constituency for the above Party.
Having polled 6,684 votes I believe that I speak for many in respect of the planned wanton destruction of our local hospital.
I have just received your letter inviting me to the feedback event on 20th June and would like to ask you what on earth you are thinking of in holding the event in Greenwich?
The hospital with the most changes being foisted on it is Queen Mary’s yet I understand that no attempt has been made to hold the feedback event anywhere near the hospital, where most of the affected people live. This includes the London Boroughs of Bromley and Bexley.
Notwithstanding this decision to hold the feedback event in about as far away from Queen Mary’s as you could, without going outside the affected area I will be ensuring that as many as are physically able attend the event to once more voice their opposition.
In the meantime, I should be grateful to receive your response to the accusation that you are seeking to make the feedback event as difficult as possible for people to attend by not holding it where it should be, which is at Bexley or Bromley Civic Centre if not nearer.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Yours sincerely
John Hemming-Clark
Party Leader
12 HOUR VIGIL on 20th September 2008. Over 400 signatures collected.
photo copyright News Shopper.
Thursday 29 May 2008
Friday 23 May 2008
Independent Reconfiguration Panel
I have today written to members of something called the "Joint Health Overview & Scrutiny Committee" to request that they refer the A Picture of Health consultation to the Secretary of State for Health as I am not satisfied 1. with the content of the consultation and 2. that the proposal is in the interests of the health service in our area. Will you write too? My letter follows...
The Secretary of State announced to the House of Commons last year that he would as a matter of course ask the Independent Reconfiguration Panel (IRP) for advice on any such referrals. The Secretary of State will make any final decision but the IRP may undertake a full review involving you and me and our comments and evidence.
On the strength of an IRP referral, several hospitals have been saved as fully admitting hospitals. Please write to (Bromley Council) Councillor Charles Rideout, Chairman - Adult & Community PDS Committee, c/o Members Room, Bromley Civic Centre, Bromley, BR1 3UH or (Bexley Council) Councillor David Hurt, Chairman - Delivery of NHS Services Scrutiny Sub-Group & Health Scrutiny Committee Member, c/o Bexley Civic Offices, Broadway, Bexleyheath, DA6 7LB.
Dear
I am writing to request that you ensure that the Joint Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee reports the A Picture of Health consultation to the Secretary of State for Health for referral to the Independent Reconfiguration Panel for an independent review on the grounds that your electorate is satisfied neither with the content of the consultation nor that the proposal is in the interests of the health service in the local area. The content of the consultation does not allow for respondents to choose to retain Queen Mary's as a fully admitting hospital and is not in the interests of the health service in the local area for the following reasons:
1. The further one has to travel in an A&E department in an emergency, the greater the risk of mortality.
2. There has been no forward planning to cope with the increased patient throughput at Princess Royal, both in A&E and maternity, units which are already overstretched, due to any closures at Queen Mary's and elsewhere and the projected 100,000 increase in the local population over the next 10 years.
3. All 3 options in the consultation with regard to the downgrading of maternity services are a denial of choice as voiced by the Royal College of Midwives and in contradiction of the Department of Health's stated aims.
Further reasons can be supplied, however, I would hope that the above would be sufficient to convince you of the need to refer the consultation to the Secretary of State.
I trust that you agree, and look forward to your response.
Yours sincerely
NAME
The Secretary of State announced to the House of Commons last year that he would as a matter of course ask the Independent Reconfiguration Panel (IRP) for advice on any such referrals. The Secretary of State will make any final decision but the IRP may undertake a full review involving you and me and our comments and evidence.
On the strength of an IRP referral, several hospitals have been saved as fully admitting hospitals. Please write to (Bromley Council) Councillor Charles Rideout, Chairman - Adult & Community PDS Committee, c/o Members Room, Bromley Civic Centre, Bromley, BR1 3UH or (Bexley Council) Councillor David Hurt, Chairman - Delivery of NHS Services Scrutiny Sub-Group & Health Scrutiny Committee Member, c/o Bexley Civic Offices, Broadway, Bexleyheath, DA6 7LB.
Dear
I am writing to request that you ensure that the Joint Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee reports the A Picture of Health consultation to the Secretary of State for Health for referral to the Independent Reconfiguration Panel for an independent review on the grounds that your electorate is satisfied neither with the content of the consultation nor that the proposal is in the interests of the health service in the local area. The content of the consultation does not allow for respondents to choose to retain Queen Mary's as a fully admitting hospital and is not in the interests of the health service in the local area for the following reasons:
1. The further one has to travel in an A&E department in an emergency, the greater the risk of mortality.
2. There has been no forward planning to cope with the increased patient throughput at Princess Royal, both in A&E and maternity, units which are already overstretched, due to any closures at Queen Mary's and elsewhere and the projected 100,000 increase in the local population over the next 10 years.
3. All 3 options in the consultation with regard to the downgrading of maternity services are a denial of choice as voiced by the Royal College of Midwives and in contradiction of the Department of Health's stated aims.
Further reasons can be supplied, however, I would hope that the above would be sufficient to convince you of the need to refer the consultation to the Secretary of State.
I trust that you agree, and look forward to your response.
Yours sincerely
NAME
Monday 19 May 2008
Elmstead Lane: Letter to Bromley Extra
I found the response from Cllr. Colin Smith to Bromley Extra's Elmstead Lane campaign inadequate in the extreme. He states that "quick" isn't the same as "effective" without acknowledging that both are possible. He states that it would be wrong to speculate on the causes of the two recent deaths without acknowledging that whatever the cause increased speed exacerbates a situation. He states that Bromley's overall safety record is good and that it has won government reward monies as if that absolves the Council from any urgency in tacking the problem. Finally he alludes to a period of an evaluation by traffic engineers. I would predict that the solution offered will be bumps, lumps, chicanes and other road calming methods aimed at slowing down the driver whilst damaging his back, vehicle and temper, the local scenery and council tax-payer's wallet. They will slow down the emergency services, create more noise and air pollution whilst having no impact on road casualty figures.
Bromley Council is facing in two directions. On the one hand it wants to encourage people out of their cars and has a unit dedicated to encouraging children to walk to school. On the other hand it wants to increase traffic flows through the Borough. However, freeing up the roads will then encourage other people back into their cars! We have to realise that road use will continue to increase in the future whilst pedestrians, especially younger and older ones, will become more reluctant to walk anywhere. We have to find a way of living with both cars and pedestrians. Let me propose a solution.
Chislehurst, Bickley, Petts Wood and other areas are inside a triangle formed by the A20, A224 (Sevenoaks Way) and A212 (Burnt Ash Lane through Bromley Common). Free up the traffic flow around this mini South Circular through reducing access to and from minor roads inside the triangle. Make ALL the roads inside the triangle a maximum 25mph zone with notices at every entry point to the triangle. Have full-time dedicated patrols (which would be self-funding) rigorously enforcing the speed limit quickly and effectively against EVERY speeding driver EVERY TIME. It will soon make speeding inside the triangle as unacceptable as, say, drinking and driving. Anyone driving through the triangle, which is at a maximum only about 4 miles across, will, if able to travel at the speed limit, see their journey time increase by less than 2 minutes. If you knew for certain that vehicles have slowed down considerably outside your front door and you are just not going to see a crazy speeding driver from one month to the next, would you let your granny or pre-teen out on their own? I would.
Bromley Council is facing in two directions. On the one hand it wants to encourage people out of their cars and has a unit dedicated to encouraging children to walk to school. On the other hand it wants to increase traffic flows through the Borough. However, freeing up the roads will then encourage other people back into their cars! We have to realise that road use will continue to increase in the future whilst pedestrians, especially younger and older ones, will become more reluctant to walk anywhere. We have to find a way of living with both cars and pedestrians. Let me propose a solution.
Chislehurst, Bickley, Petts Wood and other areas are inside a triangle formed by the A20, A224 (Sevenoaks Way) and A212 (Burnt Ash Lane through Bromley Common). Free up the traffic flow around this mini South Circular through reducing access to and from minor roads inside the triangle. Make ALL the roads inside the triangle a maximum 25mph zone with notices at every entry point to the triangle. Have full-time dedicated patrols (which would be self-funding) rigorously enforcing the speed limit quickly and effectively against EVERY speeding driver EVERY TIME. It will soon make speeding inside the triangle as unacceptable as, say, drinking and driving. Anyone driving through the triangle, which is at a maximum only about 4 miles across, will, if able to travel at the speed limit, see their journey time increase by less than 2 minutes. If you knew for certain that vehicles have slowed down considerably outside your front door and you are just not going to see a crazy speeding driver from one month to the next, would you let your granny or pre-teen out on their own? I would.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
