|
VISITOR
INFORMATION
TOWN COUNCILLORS
names and addresses
TOWN COUNCIL
WEBSITE
CHIPPY CLASSIFIEDS
LOCAL
CHIPPY NEWS
IS NOW HERE
All phone numbers on this site are code 01608 unless shown
otherwise.
OTHER CHIPPY WEB SITES
Comments, Ideas,
Criticisms, Articles
E-MAIL US
Finding us
A "secret"
road
Description
Map of Chippy
Stay in Chippy
Stay nearby
Holiday Cottages
Things to see
Chippy's Pubs
Pubs Nearby
Restaurants
Some History
LOCAL
NEWS PAGE
HOSPITAL
RECENT NEWS
BBC WEATHER
LOCAL
WEATHER
STATION
TOWN DIARY
FORUM
TOWN INFO
Census Info
Bus & Rail
CLUBS &
SOCIETIES
TOWN COUNCIL
Appraisal
BUSINESS
DIRECTORY
OUR MP
LOCATIONS
DRINKING/EATING
SHOP LOCATIONS
HIGH ST/MIDDLE ROW
WEST ST
NEW ST /MARKET ST

GO TO
FORUM
Visit
the
Theatre
website

CATCH UP
WITH
PREVIOUS
ARTICLES
NEWS STORY
INDEX
PEOPLE
YVONNE BARNES
ROBIN
SMITTEN
RALPH MANN
DON DAVIDSON
EVE COLES
THE VICAR
RONNIE
BARKER
FEATURES
THE
LAST
PARCEL BOY
ST MARY'S
CN
HOSPITAL
MANOR HOUSE
CHIPPY MARKET
REGULATED PASTURE
HENRY CORNISH
BURGAGE PLOTS
THE WHITE HART
CN BOWLS CLUB
CRAFT GALLERY
VINTAGE SPORTS CAR
CLUB
AVIATION
HISTORY
SKIES OVER
CHIPPY
CN AUSTRALIA
CREAMWARE
FAMILY
HISTORY
ONE
ARTIST & CN
JUBILEE
ANISH KAPOOR AT
ROLLRIGHT STONES
SHORT STORY BY
PETER BUCKMAN
PHOTO COMPETITION
POWER OF SNOW
ROUSHAM
SIMNEL CAKE
UP NORTH
ST VALENTINE
CUSTOMS
WHITBREAD
BOOK AWARDS
OLD SHOPS
REVIEWS
BY GEORGE
HUMMER
SINBAD
PICASSO
WOMEN OF OWU
TRIO
JACK & THE BEANSTALK
LA BOHEME
METAMORPHOSIS
TASTE
| |
|
|
|
|
|
HOSPITAL PLANNING
APPLICATION DEFERRED FOR THE FOURTH TIME. THINGS ARE NOW SERIOUS! |
|
District Councillor
Charles Cottrell-Dormer (a long-standing friend of Chippy) summed things
up for a lot of us at the Planning Committee meeting in Witney today (6th
November). He said - "I am getting seriously worried that this hospital
may never be built". The Head of Planning Ian Morrow replied that he
shared those concerns. This was the fourth time the planning application
has been deferred and we were told there is no chance of it coming back to
the committee before January. This is now getting really serious. The
current crisis all revolves around the question of whether the Planning
Authority (the District Council) should have asked the Applicant (the
County Council) for an Environmental Impact Assessment including a
Transport Appraisal when the application was first made. They didn't do
so. Town and Country Estates (the owners of Cromwell Park) said they
should have asked for one and employed expensive consultants to argue
their case. They are worried about the access to the hospital sharing the
existing road from Banbury Road into Cromwell Park. The County Council
said it wasn't necessary because all that was happening was that existing
services were being replaced. The District had to first take advice from
the Government of the South East as to whether it was OK to ask for an
Environmental Impact Assessment at this late stage. It was. They then
asked their own consultant to say whether one was necessary. Their
consultant said it was necessary. So the District have now advised the
County - months after receiving the planning application - that it wants
an Environmental Assessment. The County will have to get one done. And
they will also have to allow for a period of three weeks for consultation.
That all takes us to January If that assessment calls for different
access arrangements then new plans will have to be drawn up and a new
application will have to be submitted which will take us well into next
year. Meanwhile the County is supposed to be taking a final go/no go
decision on the Care Home development on Nov 21st. They can't do that with
the Planning Situation in a mess. Between them the professional Property
Men at County Hall and the professional Planners at Witney have succeeded
in engineering a monumental cock-up. There is no excuse as to why this
application has been handled so ineptly. No reason why the local
authorities did not consult in detail with the owners of Cromwell Park way
back in the proceedings. Now with so much delay the hospital plans start
running into an NHS cost-cutting phase and getting mixed up in budget
reviews by a completely new PCT. The old brigade who conceived the plans
have long since gone. The County seem to need to fix their budgets soon
and finalise their plans for new care homes. They are getting impatient.
Together the PCT, OCC and WODC have got us into this mess. Together - they
now need to get us out of it. The people of this town will not forgive
them if - after years of discussion - they do not deliver on their promise
to provide us with a new purpose-built hospital.
Reaction has been swift on Tuesday morning.
Hilary Biles plans to raise the issue at a full County Council Meeting in
Oxford today. Clive Hill (Secretary of the Hospital Action Group)
describes the situation as "worrying" and has written on behalf of the
town to Keith Mitchell (Leader of OCC)
asking for
confirmation that OCC are still fully committed to the
whole project as
it was presented to us at the end of the
consultation. Jo Graves (Chairman
of the Hospital League of Friends)
said "Charles Cotterell-Dormer has posed
the question that I think many might be asking. We seem to be experiencing
one gaffe after another".
What is surely now needed is a Joint District and County Working Group to
find out exactly what's gone wrong and how we get it right. Councillor
Mike Howes said yesterday "Somebody needs their bottom kicking". This
looks like a case for Barry Norton - the most effective bottom kicker in
the West! Barry could surely get us out of the hole his Planners have
dropped us into. We know he is committed to Chippy getting its new
hospital. Failing that - perhaps the Independent Charles Cottrell-Dormer
(Planning guru) could get together with LibDem Stuart Brookes (Health
guru) and find a way forward for the ruling party. |
|
|
|
CONSULTANT CLINICS
REPRIEVED
FOR THE MOMENT.
NOW THE REAL BATTLE BEGINS |
|
On
Wednesday 18th October at the Council Meeting in Witney Councillor Hialry
Biles - who is the Cabinet Member for Health - announced that the PCT and
John Radcliffe Trust had now withdrawn their proposals to axe four
specialist clinics at Chippy Hospital. This followed a week of heavy
protests from many community representatives and a weekend of serious
pressure from Hilary. But this is only a reprieve. The matter now moves to
the Overview and Scrutiny Committee who will decide whether the proposed
changes are "substantive" and whether a full consultation is required. Any
one with concerns must make their voice heard now. If you want to keep the
four specialist clinics (two gynae, ENT and general medical) then you MUST
write now and make your views known. This potentially affects everyone in
the town but it is specially important if you or
any of your family uses or have used any of these specialist clinics.
Another major concern is that if our hospital loses its specialist clinics
this will certainly compromise the development of facilities at the new
hospital. Please spend a few minutes dropping an e-mail to Hilary Biles expressing
your concerns. And be sure to include your name and address. If you have
friends or neighbours who are worried please tell them about this. Please
do it now!
e-mail: hilary.biles@westoxon.gov.uk
Write to: Hilary Biles,
Maple House,
Church Path, Shipton under Wychwood, Oxon OX7 6BQ
|
|
|
|
'Tory areas targeted for
hospital closure'
By
Andrew Ffrench
|
|
David Cameron has accused Labour of targeting community hospitals in
Tory areas for closure. The Tory leader and Witney MP, yesterday told the Oxford Mail the
Government was more interested in politics than patients.
His comments came after a nationwide analysis showed Conservative or
Liberal Democrat constituencies were bearing the brunt of closure threats.
A report carried out by the Community Hospitals Association revealed
there are 62 closed or at-risk hospitals in Conservative constituencies,
eight in Liberal Democrat seats and 11 in Labour areas.
Of the 10 community hospitals closed this year, five fall in
Conservative-held seats and four are in Lib Dem areas.
In Oxfordshire there are six hospitals under threat of closure or loss
of services. Five of them - Townlands, Bicester, Wallingford, Wantage and Didcot -
are in Conservative constituencies. The sixth, Abingdon, falls within Lib
Dem MP Evan Harris's constituency. Another hospital whose future is under review, Chipping Norton, is also
in a Conservative constituency.
Mr Cameron said: "Across the country there are cuts to frontline
services that may have been influenced by ministers more interested in
political rather than patient outcomes. No wonder Labour have lost the public's confidence in their ability to
run our NHS." Earlier this month at his party's annual conference in Bournemouth, his
first as party leader, Mr Cameron said his national campaign to defend
health services from Government "cuts" had been prompted by threats to
services in his own county. He told the Oxford Mail: "What I've seen in Oxfordshire has definitely
helped inspire me to make this into a big national campaign.
We have got that terrible combination of big deficits and real service
reduction. People are not just disappointed but they are perplexed, after all the
money that has gone into the health service, that there are such huge
programmes of closures and redundancies and cutbacks."
The Department of Health has insisted that Government ministers do not
have the ability to choose directly which hospitals close or stay open.
|
|
|
|
FLAK ALL AROUND ON HEALTHCARE
|
There is so much flak
flying
at the moment and it seems certain that
the temperature of the health debate will rise even further in coming months. What are the
strands of the debate which are of particular interest to us in Chippy?
1. There's our new hospital and care home which has hit a few snags but
(touch wood) is still on track for a Final OK by the County Council Cabinet
on November 21st.
2. There's the big
consultation which has just ended about long-term Plans for the Oxford
Radcliffe Trust - including proposals for the Horton.
3.
There's the short-term cost savings which have to be made in Oxfordshire
THIS YEAR to balance the budget.
4. There's a campaign being
mounted by the Conservatives opposing Mr Brown's cuts in the NHS - with
claims and figures being hotly contested by the government.
5. Then
there's a new and rather different campaign being run by David Cameron
accusing the government of closing community hospitals in non-Labour areas -
with worrying implications for us!
We mustn't
get these threads all mixed up together. They are different!
1. Chippy's New
Hospital
There are three issues (with much more detailed background described further
down the page)
(a). VAT. Despite an appeal to the Inland Revenue there is as yet no news.
David Cameron wrote to Gordon Brown pleading our case three months ago and
still hasn't had a reply so what chance do the rest of us have? If the VAT
appeal is not allowed the nurses in the hospital will have to be employed by
the Order of St John. Not what anyone wants but unavoidable.
(b). The legality of the property deal being
proposed. We hear that counsel
has now said that the proposed deal is legal but with an important proviso.
All the proceeds of an eventual sale of the old hospital must revert to the
NHS. That probably means that less money will actually be retained within
the town than if some of the proceeds had gone to the County Council because
the NHS will regard such funds as part of its overall resources and able to
be spent wherever they are needed. Not the ideal outcome but it means
things can still move ahead.
(c). Objections to the planning Proposal
These are on transport grounds by the owners
of Cromwell Park. The Town Council are also asking for reassurances about
bus connections to the new site. Discussions are ongoing with the planners
about these issues and they should be solved soon - but they do need to get
a move on!
2. The Consultation on the Horton Proposals
There has been huge opposition to the proposals to cut maternity and
children's services and 24 hour surgery at the Horton. Now the County
Overview and Scrutiny Committee have really cut up rough and said they think
the cuts are "unsafe". They have demanded that either the Trust abandon the
proposals or get an independent assessment of the effects of the cuts - with the threat of
referring the proposals to the Secretary of State. This consultation is not
over yet.
3 Money Saving in the Radcliffe
Trust
There was a threat that
Specialist clinics would be withdrawn - without any consultation.
Protests were made by the GPs the Action Groups, the GMC and the Town
Council. Hilary Biles led the blitzkrieg for the District and there
has been a temporary reprieve but this crucial battle continues. Loss of
specialist clinics could compromise the new hospital.
4. Stop Mr Brown's Cuts
This is blatantly political territory and there is no doubt David
Cameron is making big waves by "stealing" the Labour Party's clothes on the
NHS. Dave's claim of 20,000 job cuts is ridiculed by the government but at a
Press Briefing yesterday the new NHS boss was unable to come up with any
other figure. Incredible.
5. Community Hospitals are closed in Tory and
LibDem seats
This is a bit difficult to swallow. The Tories have not yet answered the
fairly obvious point that most community hospitals are in rural areas which
also happen to vote Tory. But we need to watch this carefully because a
community hospital in the Tory Leader's very own constituency looks to
be in double jeopardy! As a senior OCC officer said recently - "We shouldn't
expect the Ministry of Health to do David Cameron any favours".
The Action Groups in the town - led by the Vicar Steven Weston and District
Councillor Chunky Townley will carry on the three year old fight for Chippy
hospital and they will do their utmost to keep party politics out of it! We
will overcome!
|
|
|
|
HOSPITAL PLANS DEFERRED AGAIN |
|
The
Hospital planning application was deferred
for a third time
on October 2nd and it was absolutely nothing to
do with a shuttle bus or what the Town Council had said. This time the owners of
Cromwell Park threw a large spanner in the works.
It's clear that the main concern of
County Estates (owners of Cromwell Park) is that Cromwell Business Park is going
to be completely messed up by having access to the hospital from Banbury Road
sharing the same road as their Business Park tenants. There will be congestion,
parking problems and getting out into the Banbury Road will be very difficult
for everyone.
County Estates are
furious that no Transport Assessment has been done. No attempt has been
made to estimate traffic flows or densities. They are convinced that this
would show the access arrangements and main road junctions as being
completely unsuitable. They say its clear there is not enough parking.
There is no provision for buses to turn round. Public Transport
arrangements are unsatisfactory (particularly siting of bus stops and
shelters).
The applicant
– the County Council say a Transport Assessment is not required since all
that is happening is that existing medical services are being replaced and
therefore "there will be no effects on the local transport network". (This
seems a very dodgy assertion since so many more people will be accessing
the surgeries and the hospital by car now they have a longer distance to
go While in the past most people could walk to the West St Surgery the
people from (for example) Cornish Road are not going to trek up to the new
site on foot!) County Estates have had
three groups of traffic consultants working on this. The Planners
summarised their reports extremely briefly at the meeting. One of the
consultants (PDPS) says the correct procedure for a development of this
size and importance is that before an application is submitted the
applicant must ask the Planning Authority for a Screening Assessment. In
this the applicant is told what is required. Specifically whether a
Transport Assessment is needed (or an Environment Assessment or an
Employment Assessment etc). They go on to say that a Transport
Assessment is particularly important in this case because OCC are both
the applicant and the Highways Authority.
OCC did not ask for
a Screening Assessment. The Planning Authority did not ask for a Transport
Assessment. Country Estates therefore say there has been a serious
procedural flaw and have appealed to the Government Office of the South
East to rule that a Transport Assesment is necessary before the
application is determined. The Planning officer told the committee that
until there was a response on this point from the Office of the Government
the Planning committee should not try and progress things. Otherwise they
may be found to have made an "illegal" planning decision which would be
really serious.
So the Hospital is
now awaiting three crucial decisions – the Inland Revenue must decide
about VAT. Legal Counsel must decide about the Transfer of property from
the NHS to the OCC. And now the Office of the Government must decide
whether a Transport assessment is needed before planning permission can be
given. In attempting to put together such a
complex deal the OCC and NHS were always going to be running into the
kinds of problems which innovators always have, At every turn a
difficult problem has cropped up with no easy answer and no
precedent to provide guidance. This kind of thing always takes time
and the mistake has been for the OCC to impose such heavy pressure on the
whole process – claiming that the Castleview situation could not
wait. They are still insisting that there must be an absolute deadline
decision on Nov 21st. This has led to lack of preparation and
lack of thorough consultation with stakeholders. Both the NHS and
the OCC have been trying to railroad the plan through. This has to
stop. Lets all take a few steps back and get things quietly sorted. After
three years of discussion, the people of Chipping Norton will not easily
forgive our local authorities if this Hospital Plan is not brought to a
successful conclusion.
Rob
Evans – Town Councillor and County Councillor for Chipping Norton until
last year - said this morning – “You would have hoped that developers,
neighbouring landowners, OCC and WODC would
have ironed these issues out BEFORE getting to
two planning meetings and consequently ending up with two deferrals.
Sorting it out at the planning meetings is ridiculous, unacceptable and
wasteful of resources and just leaves us as the
local community and the whole scheme vulnerable”.
Comments are awaited from the other key players in this saga. |
|
|
|
|
|
"CHIPPY HOSPITAL PROPOSAL
IS LIKE A MAFIA DEAL" |
|
There's only one issue that really really matters in
this town at the moment and that's the new hospital. As everybody tries to
get things finally tied up last-minute snags keep popping up. Tempers are
fraying and some people are accusing other people of delaying things. This
is daft. Everybody wants the same thing. The County Council say they are
going to make a final, decision on Nov 21st. Its not at all clear
why any kind of deadline is really necessary but they seem to want to put
the pressure on. There are three problems but only one could
actually stop the whole project going ahead.
First Problem: The VAT man has made a silly ruling which has
gone to appeal. If that appeal fails then the hospital nurses will have to
be employed by the Order of St John - not the NHS. Nobody wants that but
there's no option. Second Problem: The
only way the new site works is with frequent, reliable transport links.
Ideally we want those services guaranteed before the planning application
is approved. There is some posturing going on around this between the
Planners, the County Council Transport Department and the Town Council but
this will be settled OK. Nobody is going to see this whole project fail
for the sake of a shuttle bus! The Third Problem
is the big one and potentially very serious. It could stop the hospital
project all together. This is how we outlined the problem a few weeks ago.
The NHS have a unique accounting system. Assets (including land and
buildings) are increased in value each year by an indexing system with
occasional revaluations. Unless you watch these indexed numbers very carefully
they can become quite unrealistic. The "book value" of Chippy Hospital has been
allowed to increase through indexation to over £3m. The most optimistic estimate
of the site's value is just over £1m. When this sort of discrepancy occurs the
NHS rules require Trusts to make up the difference between these two figures out
of revenue (ie income) when the asset is either sold or closed down. As we know,
all Oxfordshire PCTs are desperately short of ready cash so this is simply
not an option. The County Council and the PCT have devised a scheme to get
round this problem and avoid paying the penalty. It makes use of legal
provisions which allow the NHS to make grants to a local authority in respect of
the supply of healthcare services in which both parties are involved. The NHS
will make a grant of £3m to the OCC. The OCC will use that cash to buy the
hospital. A service agreement defines what services will be supplied and
by whom and how any proceeds from the hospital's eventual sale will be used. To
a layman the whole deal sounds very dodgy. A bit like smoke and mirrors.
The Joint Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee
discussed the issue in depth on Thursday 21st September. Our
representative District Councillor Ian Hudspeth played a blinder. He
pressed really hard and demanded to know from the PCT why just when we
think everything is sorted, another problem appears. Why on earth wasn't
this "property" problem foreseen? After all, these plans and preparations
have been going on for years now. Three times he put the question. And he
finally got an answer from a top executive from the new All-Oxfordshire
PCT - a lady we have never met before. She as good as admitted that the
old PCT had simply not had the expertise to deal with with this kind of
very complex "accounting" matter. Which was one of the reasons why the new
larger PCT authorities - with more specialist managers - would be so much
more able to deal with the restructuring plans now underway in the county.
Personally I found this totally credible and convincing - almost the first
time any senior PCT executive has really communicated with us honestly and
straightforwardly. Quite simply first Cherwell Vale PCT and then North
Oxfordshire PCT were "winging it".They were out of their depth. It
certainly explains why we got different figures and different explanations
at every meeting we had with them. The Committee tore into the NHS rules
and regulations and thought they were barmy. The way these rules confused
"capital" and "revenue" was simply getting in the way of sensible
planning. They determined to write to the Department of Health and ask
them to reconsider their accounting procedures. One councillor said that
if a District Council tried to handle its capital account in the way the
NHS did, then John Prescott would be down on them like a ton of bricks.
Why the double standards? They then moved on to consider the proposed
solution. The air got blue. "Money-laundering" "Like a Mafia Deal"
were the sort of descriptions being used. "There must be a catch."
Indeed there is a catch - which is that the whole plan may not be legal.
Apparently the Strategic Health Authority had no suggestions to make but
the PCT were told in no uncertain terms that it was the PCT's
responsibility to stay within the law. No comfort or support there then.
So the PCT and the County Council are getting some expert legal advice and
taking counsel's opinion. It probably all depends on how the basis of the
grant from the NHS to the OCC is expressed. If the grant is simply for the
OCC to buy a hospital from the NHS then that would be such a transparent
fiddle that it would not pass the lawyers. Committee members had some
constructive suggestions for more creative wording. But this hasn't all
been defined yet and counsel is waiting on the wording to give an opinion.
We were assured that this would all be clear in time for the OCC November
meeting. Some committee members thought it could take longer. Nail biting
weeks ahead. The reason everyone is taking it all so seriously is that
there are many other NHS assets around the county where the same kind of
valuation nonsense could scupper local plans. Its just our bad luck in
Chippy that we seem to be the first case in the county to raise such
complex challenges. Fingers firmly crossed everyone! A new Chippy hospital
now depends on one bigtime lawyers say so! |
|
|
|
Town
council demands blamed
for causing hospital delays
|
|
CHIPPING
Norton Town Council has been accused by a local district councillor of
delaying plans for the proposed new hospital, care home and GP surgery for
the town. Cllr Robert Townley
(pictured right) said a decision by West
Oxfordshire District Council's planning committee had had to be deferred -
for the second time this year - because of demands by town councillors.
The council had called for more parking spaces to be included in the
plans, which were redrawn to include 30 extra spaces. Last month they
wrote to Cherwell Primary Care Trust and West
Oxfordshire County Council asking for a shuttle bus service as a priority
to help residents get to the site, plus pedestrian crossings in London
Road and Banbury Road. Cllr Townley told Monday's town council meeting: "I
cannot imagine anyone is going to commit to providing a shuttle bus
service for a hospital that is only a proposal. I cannot see any point in
delaying the plans at this stage." He suggested the
town
council writes to district planners making it clear they would like the
hospital proposal, currently at an outline stage, to go ahead but pointing
out they want the issues taken into consideration at a later stage.
However, the town council was unapologetic and remained adamant that the
site at Rock Hill should have the dedicated shuttle bus service agreed
now. Cllr Rob Evans (pictured left), said: "From
the start we have said we want improvements to bus services and a shuttle
bus to enable people to get on to the site. We have asked the county about
this and received no response. This has to be a decision by
the county council's cabinet." The town council's transport committee is
hoping
to meet district planners and county officers next week.
|
|
|
|
HOSPITAL APPLICATION
DEFERRED AGAIN |
There
was a surprise decision at the Planning Committee this week. A revised
Planning application for the new hospital was not approved for a second
time. Suddenly we are just not sure what on earth our District Council is
up to. Worries about Parking spaces had been addressed since the previous
meeting. Thirty new spaces had been added, but this time the Town Council
had once again pressed concerns that we should be guaranteed a frequent
and regular public transport service linking the new site on London Road
to the Town Centre. Eve Coles had said at the Town Council's
discussion...."A shuttle bus or very frequent buses at all times is
essential and that was the main understanding or
proviso of most of those local folk eventually accepting this new edge of
town site".
In their
submission to the planners the Town Council said...."Council is
agreed that a dedicated shuttle bus service should be provided for the
site. The planning permission given should ensure that a shuttle bus
service is provided and maintained as a key feature of the development.
This service should include pick-up points around the town so that
residents without cars will be able to visit the care home, hospital and
doctors' surgery with relative ease. It is clear
to Council that, for convenience of access of the shuttle bus, the
vehicular access within the site requires change. It
is suggested that, from the Care Home Access point from "Rock Hill Farm
Court", the Cycleway and Pedestrian Link is expanded to allow a shuttle
bus access to all parts of the site".
"Access provision to the site for pedestrians
should also be improved: pavements on both sides of the Banbury and London
Roads should be improved as required and pedestrian crossings should be
installed on both roads to ensure the safety of persons using the site."
The Town Council expected that planning permission would be granted but
subject to its concerns about access being met. Instead the Planning
Committee deferred the whole thing. Its not at all clear why they did
that. District Councillor Chunky Townley - Chairman of the Hospital Action
Group was very unhappy and thought the application should have been passed
to allow building preparations to go ahead - and discussions started to
sort out the transport and access arrangements. There was plenty of time
to do that while the building work was taking place. Town Councillor John
Grantham said afterwards...."The Town Council pointed out the
transport issue yet again, It need not have
resulted in another delay....this problem was
raised many times during the consultation but
nothing has been done to address it. Surely the
District Planning Committee could have let the outline
application go on to the next stage, and deal with the transport
and other issues under "reserved
matters" Clive Hill - secretary of the Hospital Action
Group said "The Town Council were right to raise these issues.
These problems were raised throughout the consultation process
and in numerous meetings with OCC and PCT who have both failed to include
any satisfactory binding commitment on transportation in their
plans. Perhaps some of the money that OCC will
make from this scheme could be 'ring fenced' specifically for the
provision of a mini bus shuttle service'
Rob Evans - previously County Councillor for the town said; "It is
bizarre and frustrating to have an
outline planning application deferred in this
way"
What's needed now is some
fast and serious talks between the planners, the County Council and the
Town Council to sort out the transport and access problems and avoid any
delay to the project. Building work is scheduled to start very soon. |
|
|
|
CRUNCH TIME FOR OUR NEW HOSPITAL?
|
On
Monday a revised planning application for the Care Home and Hospital
should be approved by the Planning Committee - now that provision for car
parking has been increased by 30 spaces. However there are still three
serious snags to be sorted out - at least one of which could still
potentially wreck the whole deal. The Hospital is not safe yet!
Hopefully you all
still remember the plan. Here's a quick reminder. Land on London Road
opposite the Parker Knoll site - which is owned by Oxfordshire County
Council - will be leased to the Oxfordshire Care Partnership. The OCP is a
joint venture involving two private companies - the Orders of St
John who run Care Homes - including all of Oxfordshire's - and the Pilgrim
Housing Trust who build houses and hospitals. The OCP will build a new
Care Home and Hospital using private finance. The Care Home and Hospital
will be physically separate with their own identities and entrances. The
Orders of St John will run and staff the Care Home. The NHS will run and
staff the Day Hospital and the Maternity Hospital.
There will also be
14 Intermediate Care Beds. The original plan was for these to be provided
to the NHS by the Orders of St John (to benefit from economies of scale by
sharing services with the Care Home like catering and laundry) The nursing
staff would be NHS staff. However this has proved to be a problem.
Care Homes and
Hospitals are both individually exempt from VAT but there was a danger
that a Care Home which supplied a partial service to a third party
Hospital might lose its VAT exempt status for the whole Care Home
operation. Even more seriously, the initial construction costs of the Care
Home would be subject to VAT. This would have disastrous financial
consequences for the economics of the entire development. So to avoid any
complications it was reluctantly agreed that the Intermediate care nurses
would be "seconded" to the Orders of St John but they would remain
long-term employees of the NHS. This way the day to day management of the
Intermediate Care Beds would be completely under the control of the Orders
of St John - a simple extension of the Care Home operation. Everybody was
quite confident that this arrangement would be acceptable to the VAT
authorities.
SNAG No 1
The VAT man has
refused to play ball and has ruled that unless the nursing staff manning
the Intermediate Care Beds are actually employees of the Orders of St
John, then the Care Home operation will be liable for VAT. In most
people's view this is absurd. Hospitals don't pay VAT. Care Homes don't
pay VAT. But if they get together to try and utilise resources more
efficiently a huge tax is slapped on. The PCT have appealed against the
ruling. David Cameron has written to the Chancellor (.....but as a Senior
Officer of the OCC commented at our meeting - why would the government
want to do David Cameron a favour?) The result of the appeal is expected
any day now. Keep your fingers crossed. If the VAT ruling is upheld
the PCT Board have said the Intermediate care nurses will be transferred
out of the NHS to the Orders of St John. The Action Groups are deeply
unhappy about this. They believe it is inevitable that the standard of
Intermediate nursing care will soon deteriorate if it the responsibility
of a company with virtually no experience of running hospitals. Nurses
will not be part of an NHS career structure and will not have access to
NHS training. Recruitment will become even more difficult. Some of
the nurses are very unhappy and there is a real possibility that many will
choose not to stay - rather than transfer over. The Petition of two
years ago which attracted 11,000 signatures clearly called for
Intermediate Care nurses to stay in the NHS - so the Action Groups have no
mandate to negotiate on this point. This matter needs to be reviewed by
the County Overview and Scrutiny Committee but they are showing great
reluctance to be involved. This really is disgraceful since that Committee
is the only watchdog the public now has over healthcare services.
This was always
going to be a very complex deal to pull off with so many different
interests involved. But it now seems as if the PCT did not do their basic
homework on the most fundamental of points. As a result, what many people
feared might happen may now come to pass. The so-called Hospital could
turn out to be no more than a glorified Care Home.
SNAG 2
The NHS have a unique accounting system. Assets (including land and
buildings) are increased in value each year by an indexing system with
occasional revaluations. Unless you watch these indexed numbers very
carefully they can become quite unrealistic. The "book value" of Chippy
Hospital has been allowed to increase through indexation to £3m. The most
optimistic estimate of the site's value is just over £1m. When this sort
of discrepancy occurs the NHS rules require Trusts to make up the
difference between these two figures out of revenue (ie income) when the
asset is either sold or closed down. As we know, all Oxfordshire PCTs are
desperately short of ready cash so this is simply not an option.
The County Council and the PCT have devised a scheme to get round this
problem. It makes use of legal provisions which allow the NHS to make
grants to a local authority in respect of the supply of healthcare
services in which both parties are involved. The NHS will make a grant of
£3m to the OCC. The OCC will use that cash to buy the hospital. A
service agreement defines what services will be supplied and by whom and
how any proceeds from the hospital's eventual sale will be used. To a
layman the whole deal sounds very dodgy. A bit like smoke and mirrors.
Or as somebody described it last week - a three card trick. But you have
to understand public finance and accounting to really find your way round
this particular maze. However, the PCT told us in a meeting last
week that the scheme has not yet been approved by the lawyers and there is
a risk that it may not be. In that case there will be no new Hospital or
Care Home. This looks like a second area where the basic homework was
simply not done by the PCT. Didn't anyone notice that the "book Value" of
the hospital had got so far out of line with reality?
If the new scheme
does fail, it is ironic
that these arcane financial rules will pretty much guarantee that the
old Hospital will not be closed for a very long time to come. The NHS
couldn't afford to pay the £2m penalty.
SNAG 3
Townspeople have
always felt that since the Hospital was "bequeathed" to us and has been
kept going over the years with the help of massive fund-raising, the Town
has some kind of tangible and rightful stake in the place. This is not
just any old asset to be traded between temporary trustees of our
heritage. Each generation needs to fight to re-assert the legacy of the
founders and the hospital's role as a War Memorial. We had hoped that
after all the wheeling and dealing over land, fees, leases and contracts
was finished there would be something in the new hospital that would
represent a clear continuity with the original bequest and which would
maintain a sense of ownership by the local community. We don't want our
history to simply disappear in a fog of leases and sub-leases. Ideally -
after all the agreements have been worked out - we would like the town to
end up as Freeholders of the land on which the hospital is built. This
seems to us to be no more than equitable given that the NHS, the County
and the Oxford Care partnership all seem to stand to benefit from this
development scheme. The County say that if they become the owners this
will be the same thing as the town as owners. The County will represent
the local public interest. Will they forgive us for not quite seeing
things the same way? |
|
|
|
A PRESENT FROM THE PCT
The
PCT came to town on the Monday before Christmas - along with the Orders of St John and the
OCC - to meet the Healthcare Users Group. The Vicar was in the Chair.
The PCT assured us that insofar as it is possible for the NHS in
Oxfordshire to be absolutely certain about anything at the moment, the
new hospital is still firmly scheduled and planning is on time - with
building due to start next Autumn and to last eighteen months. The
opening is scheduled for April 2008. And at last the PCT had some
plans to show us. These were still being finalised and would be on
public exhibition in early February. The PCT hoped to have a model by
then as well. But the drawings were very reassuring and gave everyone
at the meeting a real feeling of optimism that things were now firmly
on track. The buildings look modern and stylish. The Care Home and the
Hospital are in two separate wings arranged around a courtyard. They
have completely separate entrances. The hospital section contains
provision for a 24-hr clinical room - the services are to be settled
in an upcoming consultation. All beds are in single rooms but use is
made of glass partitioning to facilitate nursing care. Maternity is on
a floor of its own and contains two birthing pools. The PCT are still
exploring ways in which a long-term commitment of the NHS to the site
and the town can best be evidenced. Ownership of the land may not be
the most cost efficient means of achieving this but other ideas were
outlined - which sounded really positive. Provision is being made for
the White House Surgery to re-locate to the site. Arrangements for
public transport arrangements are being discussed. The League of
Friends are being invited to to develop facilities which will help
give the hospital a "family feel". All in all a great way to end
the year. |
|
A BIG
QUESTION - STILL UNANSWERED
The biggest question of the day was - What is happening to
the money that will be raised from the sale of our old
hospital - which was bequeathed to the town? This question
is still hanging fire. The PCT say it is against the
"rules" for them to acquire an appreciating capital asset
- like buildings or land. One plan had been for them to
buy the land on which the new hospital will be built. The
official line is that when the cash is in hand, then the
PCT will have to make a business case to the Health
Authority to invest the money in services (NOT capital
assets) at the hospital which would represent an
appropriate use for the money. We really need to press
harder on this because nobody seems to have a clear
concept of what such services may be. It looks as if that
big "black hole" is re-appearing. We need a plan!


It was busy on Saturday in the Town
Hall. A constant stream of people coming in from the cold
to look at the plans for the new hospital. There were at
least a hundred visitors in the hour I was there and the
people from the PCT and OSJ were being bombarded with
questions. All in all the reception for the plans was
extremely positive. There was enormous relief that the
proposals do seem to allow for all the services everyone
wants - like intermediate care beds, X ray, Maternity, an
MIU (or First Aid Room as the PCT are now trying to call
it), and rooms for visiting consultants. Some people had
got a bit confused with the comings and goings of the last
year. This all looked more certain. Disappointment that
the Minor Injuries arrangements are not sorted out yet.
Worries about whether there is enough parking. Concern
that you can't actually drive all the way round the site.
Real interest in what transport arrangements will be made.
Will there be a shuttle bus? As for the design. A
few said it didn't look like a Chippy building and one
lady said it looked like Legoland! The plans go to the
Planning Committee next month and preliminary discussions
with the District Planners start now. I was told by OSJ
that their architects were expecting to be told either
that the design should be more Cotswolds and would
therefore need to incorporate more traditional features
(like Cotswold Stone faced walls and more traditional
window shapes) OR that it should look much more modern.
For the time being they were steering a middle course.
Which perhaps explains the rather bland feeling of the
drawings. This is going to be a very prominent and
important civic building in the town. It would be great if
it was one to be proud of - and a worthy successor to the
old Hospital building. But even our most senior citizens
have got used to the idea that things have to move
on......." My consultant will just stop coming to have
clinics in Chippy if they don't bring it up to date."
Quite so!

Left :
District Councillors Mike Howes and Hilary Biles -
enjoying a lighter moment.
Right : Mayor-Elect Gina Burrows and Guild Chairman
Maureen Shepherd in a serious discussion about parking on
the new site

Left:
Dawn Matthews-Smith County Director (Order of St John),
District Councillor Eve Coles, Jonathan Coombes (North
Oxfordshire PCT); Stephen Weston Chairman Chipping Norton
Hospital Users Group and Town Councillor Rob Evans
Right: Town Councillor Jo Graves explains a crucial point
to Jonathan Coombes (One false move and I'll shoot!)
|
|
CHIPPING NORTON COMMUNITY HOSPITAL
PLANS FOR REDEVELOPMENT
STILL ON COURSE FOR OPENING IN 2008 |
|
Plans to redevelop Chipping Norton Hospital at Rockhill Farm in London
Road, are progressing and the PCT is working with Oxfordshire County
Council and the Orders of St. John to get detailed plans ready for a
planning application in the New Year. It is hoped that if all goes to
plan, the new care home and NHS facilities, will be open by 2008.The PCT
has recently met with representatives of the Chipping Norton Health Users
Group and the Hospital Action Group to clarify the information available
so far and to answer some of the questions being asked. The following
Questions and Answers should prove helpful.
What will the new building look like ?
The new building will consist
of two separate parts; the 20-bed residential care home will have a
separate entrance from the NHS-commissioned part of the building, which
will contain a six-bed maternity unit, a state-of-the-art X-ray
department, an emergency treatment room, and 14 intermediate-care hospital
beds. This hospital part of the new building will be dedicated as the new
Chipping Norton War Memorial Hospital, and it is envisaged that the stone
over the entrance at the existing hospital will be transferred to the new
building together with other important items, for example, clock, framed
documents and so on.
The hospital beds will consist of
14 single-bed units - for good reason, because the external inspections of
Orders of St. John’s premises stipulate single-bed units. However, nursing
staff and other clinicians have yet to be consulted, and glass partitions
may be used to make nursing care easier for nursing staff.
How much money achieved from the
sale of the existing War Memorial Hospital will be re-invested in the new
building ?
The intention is, if at all possible, that the NHS part of
the building will be on land eventually owned by the NHS; however,
cash-flow problems will not allow that possibility until after the current
hospital site is sold. The District Valuer has valued the existing
hospital building at £2.1 million and the land at £900 000, but the true
market value (what developers may be willing to pay) will not be known
until it is sold. As the building won’t be marketed until after the new
building is complete, its true value won’t be known till then.
Is there any guarantee that the existing hospital will not be closed
until the new hospital is up and running ?
Yes – there will be nowhere else to put the patients !
When will drawings of the new building be available ?
Outline drawings of the new
building have been produced and when they have been approved by hospital
staff and other healthcare workers, the Orders of St. John will produce
fuller drawings.
Is there any guarantee that the NHS beds and nurses
will not be annexed into the care-home ?
Yes. It is not
possible for the 14 intermediate care beds to be used outside the NHS.
Even if there are staffing shortages after the new hospital is
commissioned, the NHS beds will not be transferred – they may be
closed, but they will stay as an NHS resource.
Will the nurses in the new hospital work for the
NHS ?
In the new hospital, staff for intermediate-care beds will
be seconded to the Orders of St. John. NHS staff (ie, nurses and other
professional staff) would work seconded to OoSJ but remain NHS employees,
having full access to the training, support, pay and conditions, and
pensions that the NHS provides or commissions. New staff, for at least the
first three years from the date of the commissioning of the new hospital
beds, would be replaced by NHS-employed staff working under the same
conditions as above. After 3 years, there would be a review of future terms
and conditions of new staff. At that point, NHS-employed staff would
remain working under the same previously-agreed contracts.
Day-to-day clinical management of the hospital beds will be carried out
by someone with a background and training in clinical issues. The Primary
Care Trust will determine the policies by which access to the 14
intermediate-care beds is managed by the nursing staff, and will have a
hands-on, commissioning responsibility to upgrade and not downgrade the
standards of service.
What about the treatment of minor injuries ?
At present, nurses will not treat some injuries as they are
not confident or necessarily competent in doing so; where there is any
complication or uncertainty indicated, they will refer minor injuries to
the Horton or the John Radcliffe Hospitals. In the hospital part of the
new building, there will be an emergency treatment room. The question of
who delivers minor injuries treatment, especially out of hours, is the
subject of further public consultation. |
|
Following the Exhibition of Hospital
Plans
Chunky Townley - Vice-Chairman of the Healthcare Users
Group (HUG) has written to Jonathan Coombes at the North
Oxfordshire PCT
 |
|
The members of HUG wish to express their thanks to the PCT
and OSJ for organizing the public display of the plans for
the proposed Hospital/Care Home. Also a special thanks to
those members of Staff who gave up their Saturday to
explain the drawings and answer questions from both
members of our group and the public. The general response
from the public of Chipping Norton and District has been
very favourable, with most feeling optimistic that this
new facility will be built and open within the next two
years. HUG held a meeting last evening to discuss the
reaction and comments of the public together with our own
opinions and concerns of the design, layout and other
outstanding issues.
The
main items of concern regarding the layout and design
are:-
1.There is a serious lack of parking spaces.
2. There needs to be good access for buses to stop and
able to turn to exit the site.
3. Is there to be a parking area for an Ambulance
stationed at the new Hospital.
4. The site seems very cramped especially with regard to
parking. Is there scope to extend further into the extra
land beyond. Where would a second Doctors Surgery be
housed, should they wish to re-locate.
5. Are there sufficient rooms for visiting Consultants,
only one is shown on the plan.
6. Are the doors in the Intermediate Care rooms of
sufficient width to allow access for beds to be moved
through.
7. Are the staff rooms to be shared by both Hospital and
Care Home staff.
8.Will the external walls of the building be built in
stone (either natural or re-constructed).
The
other major concerns of HUG/HAG and indeed the public
are:-
1. Will the Intermediate Care beds be available to
patients of all ages, not only elderly people
2. Will there be a substantial re-investment of the
capital raised from the sale of the existing Hospital into
the new Hospital. Will part of this money be used for the
NHS to purchase the land on which the new Hospital will be
built.
3. Will arrangements be agreed to ensure a frequent bus
service to the site-either by including a hospital stop on
existing routes or by means of a shuttlebus. Can any steps
be taken to ensure adequate financial provision for this
at the Planning Approval stage
4. A separate letter is being sent to the PCT regarding
the MIU, however will a Paramedic be stationed at the new
Hospital during Doctors out of hours.
5. Will any 106 agreements be imposed by the Planning
Authority on this development, if so, have you any schemes
in mind.
We
look forward to your reply in the near future. |
|
DAVID
PRESENTS CHIPPY PETITION |
On
Tuesday 28th March, David Cameron joined Members from across the
political spectrum in presenting a record number of petitions to the
House of Commons to protest against the continued threat to community
hospitals.
Following the hugely successful CHANT (Community
Hospitals Acting Nationally Together) rally, forty five petitions were
submitted to recognise the vital role played by community hospitals in
providing community based care. The previous record for formally
presenting petitions to the House was just twenty-nine in 1985.
Over one thousand people from across the country attended the rally.
It was addressed by the Conservative Party leader, David Cameron,
Liberal Democrat Health Spokesman, Steve Webb and Shadow Secretary of
State for Health, Andrew Lansley. David Cameron said, “I was delighted
to present a petition on behalf of Chipping Norton Hospital and hope
that by breaking the record the Government will listen to the will of
thousands of people across the country. Chipping Norton Hospital is a
vital and valued resource and should not face cutbacks in response to
the short-term PCT deficit.
“The recent Health White Paper promised care close to home yet the PCT
is still pushing ahead with cuts and closures to the very hospitals
that can provide it. It is time for Ministers to act to make sure
that the PCT has the resources and will to protect vital local
services.
Patricia Hewitt has repeatedly been warned that
closures are going ahead. She should issue immediate guidance to local
health bosses on how to implement the proposals in the White Paper.
Closures are still being driven by financial, not health,
considerations, with only token nods to the White paper and this must
be addressed by Ministers.”
The Chipping Norton
Hospital Action Group
participated on 28th March The Chippy
delegation was led by Clive Hill.
Several hundred signatures in support of this
record attempt by CHANT were collected in Chippy Market
Square last Saturday morning. Chippy’s
own petition last year collected over 10,000 signatures. |
|