Huddersfield NHS bosses behind a controversial hospital shake-up have been accused of treating the process with ‘contempt’.
Kirklees and Calderdale councillors on a panel responsible for scrutinising the plan yesterday launched a broadside against local NHS chiefs behind the plan.
At previous meetings the scrutiny committee had expressed mild frustration at the lack of information provided by the clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) which had authored the proposal.
But this time councillors from both boroughs – and different political parties – did not exercise such restraint in censuring CCG bosses for failing to respond to their concerns about the plan.
Despite giving CCG chiefs extra time to respond to their 19 recommendations the panel felt many of the answers were inadequately brief or off-topic.
One councillor, Clr Chris Pearson, accused the CCGs of holding the process in ‘contempt’.
The Conservative member for Stainland voted against referring the plan to Jeremy Hunt.
He slammed health bosses for withholding financial data and failing to trust the panel with commercially sensitive information.
He said: “Thanks for the apology but I would rather have a full business case.”
Panel chair and Birstall Tory councillor, Liz Smaje, said: “This does not lessen our frustration and concerns about the availability of information and timescales.”
And Labour councillor for Sowerby Bridge, Adam Wilkinson, criticised the panel for not providing a strategy on primary care, which includes GP surgeries and community clinics, in relation to the hospitals shake-up.
He said: “I find it astounding that primary care is not in the scope of this report.”
Clr Wilkinson added: “I am really disappointed to hear again that the Local Medical Committee hasn’t been involved.”
Following the decision Dr Bert Jindal, medical secretary of Kirklees Local Medical Committee which represents GPs in the borough, said he was ‘appalled’ about the lack of detail in the plans.
Dr Jindal said: “The responses received to the (panel’s) recommendations are inadequate and we are appalled that these plans have reached this level of detail without any significant input or discussion with ourselves.
“Primary care nationally and locally is in crisis and these plans will only add to that.
“We feel that the safety of the people of Huddersfield and Kirklees will be compromised both due to the loss of the facilities on the HRI site and the lack of extra provision in primary care.
“We feel that the downgrading of the HRI site effectively strips Huddersfield of a significant asset only to develop another scheme by borrowing money through another PFI at unknown terms.”
A spokesperson for Greater Huddersfield and Calderdale CCGs said the CCGs accepted the panel’s decision.
A statement from the CCGs said: “We acknowledge the committee’s decision. The consultation proposals for changing hospital and community services are based on our aim to meet the highest standards of safety and quality for patients and create a sustainable local NHS now and for future generations.
“We passionately believe the changes that we have proposed are the best way to save more lives and improve results for patients.
“The (hospitals) trust and the CCGs agree that change has to happen. The (panel) also agrees that the status quo is not an option and equally wants to see improvements in the quality of hospital and community health services.
“We now await the Secretary of State’s decision. However, we are confident that our proposals are crucial to the long-term sustainability of local services and we will continue to plan for change pending the outcome of the referral process.”
