Agenda item

The public open forum will commence at 1.00 p.m. and the following formal business of the Council will commence at 1.30 p.m. or whenever the public open forum ends, if earlier.

Question 1

Question to: Councillor Kelham Cooke, the Leader of the Council

From: Louise Horsfall

“Please can you confirm when the new Margret Thatcher statue will be installed?”

The Leader of the Council stated that as there were a number of different parties involved it was not currently possible to provide a definite date. He did, however, confirm that it would be later in 2020.

Question 2

Question to: Councillor Kelham Cooke, the Leader of the Council

From: Louise Horsfall

“Please can you confirm what will be the approximate cost to the public purse for any celebration events being organized for the new statue?”

In his response, the Leader expressed a commitment to transparency regarding the cost of any such event. He added that he anticipated that the costs would be met by external private funding. Cost would be balanced against potential benefits of commemorating a famous person from Grantham. It was expected that the unveiling of the statue would attract a large number of people, whilst the statue itself would provide a longer-term benefit by making Grantham a visitor destination and supporting the town’s museum. Reference was also made to wider regeneration work that was being planned to promote inspirational women from the town, including Edith Smith and Harriet Arbuthnot.

Ms Horsfall asked a supplementary question about the cost of security and policing for the unveiling of the statue. The Leader stated that the scale and scope of the unveiling had yet to be confirmed. It was noted that the costs of security and policing would be dependent on the person who unveiled the statue. Any event would be subject to a full health and safety assessment and project plan. He concluded by stating that more information would be made available in the public domain as it came forward.

Question 3

Question to: Councillor Kelham Cooke, the Leader of the Council

From: Vi King

“Could the council explain why we continue to have InvestSK with a CEO of £100k? Shouldn’t the council be encouraging investment into the area without using a third party. Wouldn’t that money be best used to reduce the precept for the people of the area?”

The Leader answered the question by stating that InvestSK continued to provide valued services to existing and prospective businesses including those looking to move their operation into the district. He highlighted the commitment that the council had made to encourage businesses to come to the district because of the positive impact it had on the economy. He explained that as a private company, InvestSK was able to build strong relationships with commercial companies.

The Leader referred to the Council’s proposed budget for 2020/21, which would see a reduction in the budget envelope for InvestSK and related activities to approximately £800k. This would be reflected through the focusing of the company’s activities on economic development and inward investment, stating that the outcomes the company had achieved demonstrated the value that it had brought to the district. Finally, the Leader clarified that the Chief Executive of InvestSK had not been in receipt of a salary of £100k.

As her supplementary question, Ms King asked for a breakdown of what InvestSK had delivered for the town. The Leader of the Council stated that he was happy to share this information and added that he believed that the information was already available on InvestSK’s website.

Statement

From: Bernice Cullimore

“As an on the ground hospital campaigner who has attended the weekly vigil at Grantham hospital since Aug 2016 and has also had NHS stalls in Grantham to engage with the public I know the people of this town want Grantham A&E level 1 reinstated. Downgrading to a UTC is not acceptable. Although ULHT claim it was not level 1 when it was closed, there is evidence to contrary. 

When stating we want a 24/7 walk in service campaigners should make it clear that we mean an A&E, not a UTC, otherwise the public could be misled. 

The residents of this town deserve close to home access to emergency health care, downgrading services could people's lives at risk.”

Statement

From: Liz Wilson

“Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak to you, and to the staff in SKDC’s Democratic unit for their help in arranging this. I stand every Wednesday outside our Hospital, with a stalwart band of fellow vigillers, with the sole aim of getting out A&E fully re-opened 24/7 ( though they have also, with their own time and money, refurbished some of the flower beds at the front, and often sweep and tidy up the entrance to A&E to clear it of cigarette ends).

ULHT arbitrarily, and without any consultation, decided to close Grantham and District Hospital’s Accident and Emergency Unit overnight in mid-August 2016. This was supposed to be a “temporary closure” with the aim of addressing a staffing shortage, not at Grantham, but at Lincoln County. The people of Grantham and District were promised that the A&E would re-open 24/7 when the Trust has reached a number of 22 A&E doctors. This magic figure was reached in November 2017, when the Trust was “minded” to re-open our A&E. However, by this time ULHT were in double special measures, and were advised by NHSI and NHSE not to do so. The advice was also to consider the Grantham A&E position as part of the wider Acute Services Review and the development and implementation of the Sustainability and Transformation plan. The parties were urged to deal with this as a matter of urgency. But our A&E remains closed from 18.30 in the evening to 08.00 in the morning. There is an out-of-hours GP service available from 18.30 to 23.30 – but you need to have the patience of a saint, a strong torch, and a Boy Scout Pathfinder badge to be able to find it.

So here we are, now in the fourth year of our A&E’s temporary overnight closure, with no indication of when the matter is likely to be resolved, and with the STP proposal to completely downgrade our A&E to an Urgent Treatment Centre. They are, though, dangling the carrot of 24-hour access – but under the last proposals made public (as part of The Healthy Conversation in 2019), this would entail “out of hours” access by telephoning 111.

Let us be quite clear about what an Urgent Treatment Centre can do. It is, in reality, little more than a glorified pharmacy.  It can help with sprains and strains, minor head injuries, cuts and grazes, minor scalds and burns, and the like. What it can’t do is deal with emergencies – for that, the people of Grantham will have to travel to Lincoln (journey time about 40 minutes), Boston (51 minutes), Peterborough (40 minutes) or Nottingham (45 minutes). The maximum time life can be sustained by an emergency ambulance crew is 20 minutes – so we can expect a significant increase in avoidable deaths.

At some point over the last 15 years, what we had at Grantham as a Level 1 A&E had many services removed, as the hospital has been consistently run down by ULHT. However, as far as I am aware, there was no public consultation on that change, and nothing in the signage etc, indicates that our current A&E was not functioning as  Level 1 at the time of the overnight closure – “Type 1 A&E department = A consultant led 24 hour service with full resuscitation facilities and designated accommodation for the reception of accident and emergency patients

A&E Attendances and Emergency Admissions Monthly Return Definitions, 2014, updated 2015 defines Level 3 A&E as follows:

“Type 3 A&E department / Type 4 A&E department / Urgent Care Centre = Other type of A&E/minor injury units (MIUs)/Walk-in Centres (WiCs)/Urgent Care Centre, primarily designed for the receiving of accident and emergency patients. A type 3 department may be doctor led or nurse led. It may be colocated with a major A&E or sited in the community. A defining characteristic of a service qualifying as a type 3 department is that it treats at least minor injuries and illnesses (sprains for example) and can be routinely accessed without appointment. An appointment based service (for example an outpatient clinic) or one mainly or entirely accessed via telephone or other referral (for example most out of hours services), or a dedicated primary care service (such as GP practice or GP-led health centre) is not a type 3 A&E service even though it may treat a number of patients with minor illness or injury.”

So please be in no doubt about what Grantham is being offered:

·         It is NOT a 24/7 A&E service – it is for minor injuries only, and should not even be considered as A&E provision under the definition above

·         We will lose the current A&E services available to us through the current department during the day

·         To access A&E services, whether during the daytime or at night, we will have to travel significant distance, with no guarantee that the A&E we go to will be able to cope with the influx of Grantham patients

·         Any “new build” hospital would only replicate the current provision – no 24/7 A&E at the Manthorpe Road site means no 24/7 at any new site

SKDC has ambitious plans to develop, improve and grow Grantham. A full functioning full-service 24/7 A&E is an absolute must to support this. We need it, and we need it now. I urge you to support the motion and take the strongest possible action to reinstate our 24/7 A&E immediately – that is what we fight for at the vigil, and we aren’t going to give up.”

Following the statements, the Leader of the Council thanked both speakers both for their comments at the meeting and the commitment to the cause of getting the hospital A&E re-opened. He stated that he supported the work of campaigners and wanted to see a 24/7 accident and emergency facility restored at the earliest opportunity. He thanked the Councillors that had brought forward the motion that would be discussed later in the meeting and pledged to work alongside members of the public, the Council and the Members of Parliament to get the facility re-opened on a 24/7 basis.