Agenda item

West Herts Hospitals Trust - Acute Transformation - Strategic Outline Case

An opportunity for the committee to discuss the document and then formulate a response.

The item was introduced by HB who summarised some of the issues and conclusions that form parts of the discussions, particularly on options for future provision of hospital care in West Herts. She outlined the recommendation that this would predominately be provided from the current Watford and St Albans sites with continued UCC provision at Hemel Hempstead. She pointed out that the recommendations will require formal ‘commissioning’ support.

The was a fair degree of opposition to this approach expressed by those on the committee who feel HH is not adequately provided for in the new proposals and some who felt that the HH Hospital site is being ‘run down’ to help finance the review’s proposals.

K Minier advanced alternative proposals that disputed the costs being put forward by the health professionals and claimed that the plans for the development the Watford site and the timescale for the regeneration of the Princess Alexandra wing are untenable.

DE felt that the alternatives did not compare like with like. He advised that the review team are carrying out a rigorous check and challenge process to check the figures. Their aim was not a large scale development but an effort to ‘build smaller - build cheaper’.

Cllr Taylor drew attention to the SOC on the top of page 2 which shows that the Hemel site was left out of the scope of the SOC and consequently discarded and disregarded. The only option considered was for the HH site to be pared back and developed as a local health facility. DE felt this might be viewed more positively as an opportunity for land sale and redevelopment in partnership with the local Council He has a project group working on the SOC looking at options for Hemel and believes they can create something exciting and innovative.

Cllr Mahmood replied that Dacorum people are not well served by the options on offer and believe that any benefit from the sale of the Hemel site will be used elsewhere.

HB was anxious to reassure the group that any finance from a sale will be used on health education and housing in Dacorum.

EG circulated the key points from the Hemel Action Group paper on the subject which included views mainly opposed and opposite to what the SOC contains. These included the view that it would take four years to build on a greenfield site as opposed to the 10 years redevelopment at Watford. She advised that the Trust will encounter problems during the development and cause unhelpful and unnecessary disruption to the patients. The Greenfied site should be included in the outline business case OBC. Redevelopment of the Watford site is a short term inefficient approach.

Cllr Maddern reported that her impression of the debate at the Herts Scrutiny Group was that in an ideal world they would have supported a greenfield site but went 15-2 for the development of the Watford site. She felt that Herts scrutiny Group rejected the greenfield site on financial grounds and if they had these figures (produced by HAG) then the decision might be different!

Cllr Taylor suggested that this group put together an alternative proposal which would include the list of desirables we wish to see incorporated in any decision taken. By 9 March when this will be going for decision we should have something prepared giving costs and the primary aims and objectives. Cllr Mahmood felt this document should advocate a fairer provision of services for Watford, St Albans and Hemel Hempstead.

DE thanked the committee and agreed that this could be added to his group’s own process and checks done on the due diligence of their proposals.

Cllr Taylor was of the opinion that the Health professionals will be well acquainted with the principles that are put in the DBC lists. Cllr WWL expressed surprise at the cost estimates produced by HAG and would like the opportunity to check and verify Robert Scott’s suggestions. He thought that the contributions of the two councillors involved with construction on this group would be helpful. In his opinion improvements in health provision will be easier to achieve from a fresh start. Cllr Hicks agreed that the input of a respected, credible building expert to examine SOC would be useful.

HB welcomed any challenge and changes put in writing. CW said he had no reason to believe that the figures in the SOC are inaccurate. As far as a Greenfield project is concerned, it is his experience that it would take about three years to get a project started. This could mean we will miss the available government funds and we may not get any funds towards the HH development proposals.

Cllrs Taylor and Guest agreed to utilise the 14 alternatives on page 8 of the report and use the figures provided by HB to produce an alternative set of proposals which they would circulate to the group and submit to the Health meeting on March 9.