Draft letter to PM - sent for BHRUT for comment

This is a draft of letter to Prime Minister for May 3rd. I will send it to BHRUT should they wish to challenge any of the facts I reply upon before May 3rd.

Dear Prime Minister

Consultation on the new plan to Close King George A&E/Overload Queens A&E in East London

We write regarding the new plan to close King George A&E available at the savekinggeorgehospital.blogspot.com in a post dated 11^th April 2019.

Key Extracts from closure plan which is more than a year old follow:

Page 7 of the plan shows it was agreed in 2016 with option 2 as the preferred closure option which closes King George A&E and replaces it with urgent care centre develop it as a “centre of excellence” for the elderly.

Page 10 sets out why the Trust believes why the closure plan “would not further public consultation” as it is based upon the original closure plans of October 2011.

Page 11 describes the plan as “radical”

Page 12 states the plan has “already partially commenced”

Page 13 Sets out the radical nature of the plan to “transform the care of the elderly and frail patients” to produce a “home first” model of care. “The new model of care” seeks to identify these patients through “screening mechanisms”

P14 sets out ED & UCC activity is expected to grow to c365,000 per annum in ten years at both site.

P17 sets out the aim if “consolidating certain services” onto one site rather than two by providing “emergency care at QH and geriatrics at KGH”

P33 Sets how NHS managers “have worked with local MPs and the public to evolve the discussion about the future of KGH from one of closure to one of service transformation”

The Department of Health rejected funding for this £49M closure plan in December 2018 as part of a £70M bid.

Points of Difference between signatories and BHRUT

1 - BHRUT claims this £49M plan is not a closure plan, this is hardly surprising, as page 33 describes the ambition of the trust to move the discussion to one of “service transformation”

We invite you to agree with this that this plan is best understood as closing King George A&E.

2 – BHRUT claim they are no longer seeking funding for the £49M closure plan.

In a press release of April 1^st 2019 BHRUT state

“We want to be very clear, the threat of closure of the Accident and Emergency unit arising from decisions in 2011 has been removed. There will continue to be an Accident and Emergency unit at King George Hospital. The local population has changed significantly since 2011 and is forecast to change further, there is a clear need for Accident and Emergency provision at King George Hospital both now and into the future.”

However, two days later at a meeting at Stratford Town East London STP managers present a paper backing the £49M closure plan, with a document suggesting PFI as an alternative funding source for the £49M closure plan.

On BHRUT issued another press release to stakeholders on 26^th April to say

Earlier this month we were delighted to be able confirm via a joint statement with our Commissioners and key local authority partners, that there was a firm commitment to ensuring that the Accident and Emergency unit at King George Hospital will remain open. This is fantastic news. The removal of the threat of closure means this much needed resource and provision will continue now and into the future – please share this good news with anyone who hasn’t heard it’s staying open. Nevertheless, we also expressed concern following an unsuccessful bid of £70m for capital investment. Capital investment is of critical importance, for us and for other partners in the local health economy, so despite these disappointing decisions we will continue to push for the investment we all need.

We invite you to agree that BHRUT cannot reconcile being disappointed with not getting £70M which included £49M to close King George A&E with a credible commitment to keeping it open. The final sentence about “the push for the investment” is supportive of the April 3^rd STP statement to continue for funding for the closure plan.

What we request from your office

1 The full closure plan to published, key passages have been redacted. Email addresses and telephone numbers can be redacted, we see no need for other information to be suppressed.

2 A public consultation on the new King George A&E closure plan. The authors of the new closure plan describe it as “radical”. The assumptions within the plan need to be tested with greater detail and a series of public meetings just as the original 2011 closure plan was. For example, the first closure plan saw patients from King George going to three hospitals, the new plan sends all patients being displaced from the King George A&E closure to Queens. The patient numbers provided in the plan look overly optimistic. The BHRUT board meeting of April 2019 had a verbal report of patient attendance of one thousand a day at the two sites. This level of attendance was meant to be achieved in 2028. Council Local Plans need to be closely monitored, for example one site at Goodmayes Tesco was meant to be for c700 units, the figure applied for is c1300.

ENDS

Great News: Councillor Michael Deon Burton will attend 10 Downing Street on 3rd May to call for consultation on new KGH A&E Closure plan

Great News,  Councillor Michael Deon Burton will join Councillor Nic Dodin, Bob Archer and I on 3rd May at 10 Downing Street to deliver a letter to the Prime Minister to request a public consultation over the new plan to close King George A&E, which we are concerned is likely to further overload Queens.

The East London Health & Care Partnership needs to say whether it still stands by its April 3rd Statement on new King George A&E closure plan

Yesterday, I asked the three questions below at the BHRUT board meeting:

a – Will you apologise for making your misleading statement of April 1 saying King George A&E is safe?

b- Will you commit to future good conduct by agreeing to publish bed numbers, critical bed numbers and excess death rates for King George & Queens?

c- Will you agree to public consultation of the new plan to close King George A&E?

Rather than engage with these issues, the Chair, Joe Feilder called me “malicious”

I say BHRUT should have published the new £49M plan to close King George A&E https://redbridgetradeunionparty.files.wordpress.com/2019/04/elhcp-bhrut-acute-reconfiguration-bid-foi-5926.pdf 12 months ago before it was sent to the Department of Health to seek funding for it. Not to do so was underhand. By BHRUT's own description it is a “radical” plan (first line, first paragraph, page 11).

And at page 36, the closure plan makes it clear that “alternative funding sources” are to be sought.

This is exactly what happened when East London Health & Care Partnership (ELHCP) managers give a presentation to Councillors at old Stratford Town Hall on April 3^rd.

The slides confirm what was said at the meeting which is recorded at my Facebook page, namely that the capital bids supported by the ELHCP which were turned down by the Department of Health were still sound and were to be pursued. I quote from the ELHCP slide on April 3rd:-

“We are confident that we submitted a robust, well evidenced and realistic set of bids that would significantly progress our plans to meet the care and health needs of our local populations. Partnership organisations are proactively seeking alternative funding solutions to address the inevitable and significant issues caused by the decision..” (my emphasis)

My question is to the ELHCP is so:

Do you stand by the document presented on 3rd April?

I hope you can understand that I and others cannot see how your position and that of BHRUT can both be right at the same time.

The ELHCP is senior to BHRUT, so unless you retract your statement of 3^rd April, I and others will go to 10 Downing Street on 3^rd May to seek that the new plan to close King George A&E is put out to public consultation.

After hiding the new £49M closure plan from the public, BHRUT can have no credibility on this issue.

The reality is BHRUT are committed to the new closure plan per the extract from page 125 of their board papers published yesterday.

letters for Ilford Recorder & Romford Recorder

Dear Sir 

We are baffled that Wes Streeting MP & Cllr Jas Athwal, Leader of Redbridge Council say it is "disappointing" that the government turned down funding of £70M for King George & Queens in 2018. Within the £70M is a £49M bid for works to close King George A&E. The bid document is at savekinggeorgehospital.blogspot.co.uk, which allows readers to view the plans to close King George A&E.

The Save King George A&E campaign team go to 10 Downing Street on 3rd May to say the new plan to close KGH A&E, for which PFI funding is being considered, must be the subject of public consultation before funding is sought. 

Whilst we would prefer the 2018 plan to be withdrawn immediately, NHS bosses are keen to proceed with it. An in depth consultation with greater information about bed numbers, staffing and projected patient numbers will, we believe, lead to the closure bid being withdrawn. Instead we argue that King George must be expanded to relieve the pressure on Queens.

We encourage Wes & Jas to think again and join us on the 3rd May.

Regards

Bob Archer

Syed Eyamen Siddiqi

Andy Walker

& For Romford Recorder

Dear Sir


We are baffled that  leading politicians are saying that it is "disappointing" that the government turned down of £70M for King George & Queens. Within the £70M is a £49M bid for works to close King George A&E. The bid document is at savekinggeorgehospital.blogspot.co.uk so that readers can view the plans to close King George A&E.
The Save King George A&E/Don't Overload Queens campaign team go to 10 Downing Street on 3rd May to say the new plan to close KGH A&E, for which PFI funding is being considered, must be the subject of public consultation before funding is sought.
Whilst we would prefer the 2018 plan to be withdrawn immediately, NHS bosses are keen to proceed with it. An in depth consultation with greater information about bed numbers, staffing and projected patient numbers will, we believe, lead to the closure bid being withdrawn. Instead we argue that King George must be expanded to relieve the pressure on Queens.

Regards

Bob Archer

Cllr Nic Dodin

Andy Walker

Consult on the new plan to close King George A&E & so overload Queens: Briefing for Councillors

I will be writing the below to Councillors in Barking & Dagenham, Havering & Redbridge later today.

Dear Councillors

Consult on the new plan to close King George A&E & so overload Queens

Some senior politicians are doubting the existence of a new plan to close King George A&E and so overload Queens. I provide a time frame and documents to establish beyond doubt that there is a new plan to close King George A&E.

Chronology

29th March 2019: Cllr Athwal issues a press release to say there is no plan to close King George A&E along with other Council Leaders and local NHS managers:

The full post is at 29th March Release


3rd April 2019 The Inner North East London Joint Overview Scrutiny meets at Old Stratford Town Hall. Within the agenda is a paper from the East London Health & Care partnership (ELHCP) the key slides include the below making it clear that while the £49M bid to reconfigure King George & Queens failed along with other bids, the ELHCP is keen to progress with alternative funding.

Another slide makes it clear that PFI is a possible means for funding the £49M plan to "reconfigure" King George & Queens below:

A Facebook recording of the meeting is at

https://www.facebook.com/andywalker19/videos/10219009231809508/

with the Estates Strategy discussed at the end.

11th April 2019 - Sees the partial publication of the 2018 £49M bid to reconfigure King George A&E and Queens. The full document is at £49M bid to reconfigure King George & Queens
Key pages are

The fifth bullet point in the bottom half states: "Repurpose King George A&E as an Ortho-Geriatric Receiving Unit"

A key point made in the final paragraph is that following the repurposing of King George A&E that all current BHRUT activity will stay within BHRUT. The 2011 King George A&E closure plan saw patients going to Whipps & Newham.

Page 11 below describes the plan as a "radically different model of care" at point 1.

However page 10 below says in paragraph 4 that the "project would not warrant further public consultation" as there "been ongoing engagement with stakeholders on their development". This claim seems odd as the plan was published yesterday and is still missing key parts!

Current performance at BHRUT

The following are January & February 2019 type 1 A&E performance figures obtained from FoI requests

When the safety benchmark is 95% these are alarming figures for the more seriously ill patients attending our A&E departments.

However it must be said that Queens is coping well with those requiring urgent care per the extract from a report sent to me recently:

Please find below an update on ‘streaming process and waiting times at Queen’s hospital and actions required to address any identified issues’ – as per an outstanding action from the last Joint PEF.

----------------------------------

BHR CCGs have contracted directly with PELC to provide the Queen’s Urgent Treatment Centre (UTC) service since 5 July 2018. Since then the service has been managing a steady increase in the type and number of patients being treated in the UTC, rather than emergency dept (ED). This allows ED to focus on the patients that require a higher acuity of investigations and treatment.

Urgent and emergency demand over winter is always high, with the Queen’s site particularly experiencing ‘surges’ in demand. During very busy periods there can be over 30 people walking in each hour, sometimes for a few of hours. Queues are carefully managed so the sickest people are seen first, and the occasional person that walks in acutely unwell is rapidly handed over to ED by an urgent care centre (UCC) clinician. The service has operational monitoring and escalations plans in place to manage queues, so when a queue exceeds agreed levels staff are moved within the department to manage this.

Key measures for success of this service are the number of patients treated within 4 hours and the percentage of patients they see. The Queen’s UTC consistently sees over 99.96% of their patients within 4 hours, well over the 95% target.

The percentage of people who are seen in the UTC has increased significantly since PELC has been in place. Of all the people who walk in 52% were managed in the UTC in August, in February 2019 this increased to 70%. When we add the high number of ambulances that go to the Queen’s site, which is how this is measured nationally, the percentage seen in the UTC at Queen’s was 48.37% in February.

The debate so far

Senior politicians in Redbridge claim there is no plan to close King George A&E and overload Queens. Rather than engage with the issues and evidence I have been called obsessive by Mike Gapes MP and implied to be a "crackpot" by Cllr Rai on twitter. I have suggested to them and Cllr Santos and Wes Streeting that they need to calm down and read the documents above. Abuse will not further an understanding of what is being planned for our hospitals.

What the Save King George Campaign A&E Team recommend

Bob Archer, Pete Mason, RoseMary Warrington and I met earlier today. We are seeking your support for the new plan to close King George A&E be consulted upon. With the performance figures so bad at both hospitals per the photos above it must be right that NHS managers submit their plans to detailed scrutiny via a consultation process.

We go to 10 Downing Street on 3rd May to seek the PM's intervention to intervene and order BHRUT to consult with the public on their plans.

On the face of it the new closure plans are very broad brush when compared to the 2011 closure plan and need to be either strengthened; or as I would prefer the £49M plan abandoned and a new plan with greater funding to expand acute provision at King George to cope with the growing NE London population.

BHRUT release new plan for the "elimination of the need" plan for King George A&E & planning meeting today

The new plan is at

https://redbridgetradeunionparty.wordpress.com/2019/04/12/bhrut-publish-new-elimination-plan-for-king-george-ae/

as I cannot download documents in this site.

The next Save KGH A&E planning meeting is today at midday at the Cafe at Ilford Central Library

The main item to discuss is how to make the 3rd May trip to 10 Downing Street a success.

A longer post going into detail for Councillors will be up later today.

Writing to Havering Councillors listing 4 documents to support claim there is a £49M plan to close King George A&E

Earlier today I wrote to a Havering Councillor about the £49M bid to reconfigure King George & Queens who copied in all Councillors so I wrote back to all Councillors as folllows:

Dear Councillor

Thank you for your email. I have asked BHRUT for the £49M bid document to re-configure King George and Queens as has Cllrs Nic Dodin, David Edgar, Keith Prince AM & Wes Streeting MP. BHRUT have ignored my Freedom of Information request for the bid document dated 1st March, I have commenced the next stage of the appeal process which is a request for an internal review. Should BHRUT continue to refuse to publish the document, I can make a further appeal to the Information Commissioner's Office. The final judgement about whether BHRUT have to disclose the document could be months away.

The four documents supporting the  £49M bid to reconfigure King George and Queens is a plan to close King George A&E

1) The original closure plan passed in 2011 HERE at page 27 states

4.2 Capital Expenditure Implications Estimates have been prepared of the capital investment that would be required to deliver the proposals. Investment would be required:  At Queen’s Hospital: to create a Midwifery-Led Unit (MLU) and to increase capacity for the activity displaced following the closure of the A&E department and the obstetric unit at King George Hospital.  At Whipps Cross Hospital: to extend the MLU and in the variant scenario to further increase maternity capacity.  At Newham Hospital: to create additional maternity capacity for the variant scenario.  At King George Hospital: to convert obstetric operating theatres for elective surgery and to refurbish vacated clinical space for new functions. The estimated capital cost of the variant scenario is £35.9m. 

2) The 2017 Redbridge Infrastructure local plan HERE with the implication of no future for King George A&E

I quote from page 30

"8.7 There has been significant investment in the last decade with 13 new ‘polyclinic’ health centres, Queen’s Hospital PFI and Barking Community Hospital all newly built. These centres will be at the centre of future care delivery."

& at page 33

8.14 Barking & Dagenham, Havering and Redbridge (BHR) Clinical Commissioning Groups are developing a Local Strategic Estate Plan (SEP) which is intended to support the health economy to create a fit for purpose estate at less cost, specifically addressing:  changes in demography and population demand; changes in the way that health care services are provided - specifically reflecting plans for integrated health and social care, greater levels of care within communities and new commissioning models; challenges in funding and affordability.    (My emphasis on a SEP at less cost) 

  

3) In October 2018 the Local Strategic Estate Plan (SEP) is published HERE, substantial spending proposals are made to turn options into a reality.

The options are at page 15 below with no A&E at King George A&E

"Current options for change

 Queen’s Hospital Queen’s Hospital has one of the busiest and largest emergency departments in England, and so development at Queen’s will be focused on emergency and acute medicine, emergency surgery and acute children’s services. In addition, maternity facilities could also be expandedand developed to manage the continued growth in the number of births in north east London. To facilitate this development, the renal unit at Queens could be moved to the new St. George’s hub with non-acute care of older people, and some elective surgical services moved to King George Hospital. (my emphasis)

 King George We aspire to develop a new centre of excellence for healthy ageing, working in collaboration with community care, primary care and social services to offer a fully integrated model of healthcare for older people. Centralising planned care will increase the use of beds and theatres. These changes, together with the adjacent Goodmayes Hospital site, create a strategic opportunity to develop a coherent masterplan for housing, education, community and primary health care, maximising land value across the two hospital sites."

The proposals to turn these options into a reality are listed are at page 18 and 19

"Sustainability and transformation partnership capital funding A new national £2.6bn capital fund was announced in the 2017 budget. In July 2018 STPs were invited to submit funding bids for schemes with a total value of over £100km, and schemes they aimed to deliver before 2022/23. The Partnership submitted bids for the following projects:

 • St Georges Hospital – a new community hub

 • Whipps Cross Hospital redevelopment programme management costs

 • St James’s Health Centre new development 

• Queens and King George Hospitals reconfiguration

 • City and Hackney primary care improvements

 • Expansion of Queens Hospital maternity unit 

Children’s and Young Person’s Assessment Unit at Queen’s Hospital 

• Barts Health Orthopaedic Centre at Newham Hospital"

It was not until earlier this year that the costings were published, with £49M for the King George and Queens reconfiguration,

4) The March 2019 BHRUT board papers HERE give an example of reconfiguration as follows  

"The Trust had been progressing an internal service reconfiguration whereby Holly Ward at King George’s Hospital would be transferred to Clementine B Ward at Queen’s Hospital.The Trust confirmed that the service at King George’s Hospital would be nurse-led with no geriatric medicine trainee doctors allocated to the service. The planned date of this reconfiguration of moving to a nurse-led service, supervised by 2 consultants was April 2019, resulting in improved management of outlier patients. The Trust were in the process of training the nurses to ensure that they had the required skills prior to the nurse-led service coming into effect. The ward was currently an acute ward with Trust grade doctors providing the service with consultant cover. The Chief Nurse was managing the transition but there was a recognition that the Trust would need to develop a multi-professional workforce to support service delivery." (my emphasis)

The board is refusing to say whether this this is a apparent loss of acute capacity at King George means that a ward has been lost to emergency admissions and has been replaced by a community ward for planned admissions only. 

Regards

Andy

Unacceptable wait for cancer treatment

A Redbridge resident has written the below and has given me permission to publish his account.

I would like to share my story with you and to find out if you think this level of service is acceptable.    

At the end I also include some more broad concerns about our local NHS as I do not want us to return to the state of the NHS in the late 1990s.

I think it is not acceptable to get a GP appointment in August 2018  for something that seems extremely  likely  to be a facial non melanoma cancer and to have to wait until June 2019 for a hospital appointment  ?

I will explain the full story as briefly as possible  

1.  I had a red nose in August 2018 which then became very red and inflamed so I saw a GP.  She did not seem to know what the problem was but said antibiotics might settle it down.   It partially settled down
2.  I saw a GP again in October because it was still too red.   She thought it was a non-melanoma cancer, so referred me to a local community dermatologist in November
3.   I saw the DMC dermatologist who thought there was likely no problem.
4.  In   December I found out that my GP is the dermatology lead doctor at my surgery so I went back to her.  She thought that there was still a strong likelihood of Cancer so she would refer me straight to the hospital to get it checked and most likely have a biopsy.
5.  This appointment was not for 3 months until March the 19th which worried me,  but she assured me that was ok,   but to see her if there was any change in the condition as changes with Cancer on the face can advance rapidly.
6.  After months of daily checks on the condition of my nose and just a few days before my appointment I got a letter to say it had been cancelled and to phone for a new appointment.
7.  I phoned and was told that it was now June 6th.     It seems that after a 3 month wait I have gone all the way to the back of the queue.     I was told that there is nothing I can do and no other hospital to go to !!!       This was confirmed when I checked online.    This means that if this appointment is not cancelled  I will have waited 24 weeks since the last referral and nearly 10 months since the problem started.  This is just for an initial hospital diagnoses in a hospital far from where I live.   Would you call this an acceptable service for a nose with red markings on that is possible facial cancer, even if maybe non melanoma.   
8. If not happy I was advised to phone the PALS team.......   who said they could not help and advised me to phone the Access Issues (airs)  team
9. I phoned the Access issues team  and a helper took a message and said that they would phone back the following Monday.    On the Monday I fully explained the story I have just written,  and dissatisfaction of going to the back of the queue after they cancelled my appointment.     I also explained my concerns that  my parents had awful treatment in Whipps cross Hospital in the late 1990s suffering many years of constant delays and cancellations making their conditions far far worse until it was literally too late to live !!!.    They said there was nothing they could do and just advised me to see my GP.
10.  I phoned my GP surgery who advised me to book the following week on Tuesday to see the dermatology lead GP.
11.  I set my alarm for 6am on Tuesday to go online and book with this GP before the appointments run out.    She was not available so I booked with the 1 GP that was.   
12.  He said that he would get the staff to book me with the correct GP and they would call me..   They did and my appointment   was for Friday 22nd March.
13.     I saw my Dermatology GP who said that I definitely needed attention but could likely wait until 6th June but to also mention the strange white patch on my forehead.      She advised to try to get a cancellation and to use high factor sun-cream each day, especially on the affected areas     This means that instead of finally getting an appointment for likely facial cancer, I must again think of it each day by checking for cancelled appointments and/or using high factor sun-cream when ever leaving the house.    I have also spent ages drafting this e-mail and deciding whether to send it or not.
14.  We are always being told to get checked/diagnosed for cancer at an early stage but with such a poor service and long wait it does not inspire confidence in our NHS.   
15. I am actively trying to get an earlier appointment with regular checks with the online booking system.   I have requested a May 16th appointment and am waiting to see if that is confirmed.............

  This  is my story so far....    I hope this feedback is useful to you, to help your delivery of NHS services.  

Please advise me if there is anything else that I should be doing apart from waiting.

Writing to Councillors at Barking & Dagenham, Havering & Redbridge re PFI for KGH & QH, April 1st Statement & next planning meeting

Dear Councillors

PFI Funding a possibility for £49M reconfiguration of King George & Queens Hospitals

This is the inner London JOSC meeting at Stratford Town Hall per the link below where PFI is given as a possibility for £95M for NHS deals in North East London which were knocked back by the Department of Health last year. The £49M bid for works at King George and Queens is part of the £95M total.

http://democracy.cityoflondon.gov.uk/documents/s113040/Public%20reports%20pack%2003rd-Apr-2019%2019.00%20Inner%20North%20East%20London%20Joint%20Health%20Overview%20and%20Scrutiny.pdf

A recording of the meeting is at:

https://www.facebook.com/andywalker19/videos/10219009231809508/

My request for the £49Mbid document to be published is toward the end of the meeting, it is ignored, but I will keep pressing the issue.

Inner London Councils and the public were given an opportunity to question NHS managers on these prospective PFI plans two days ago at this meeting. It is odd that the same paper including these PFI options has been left out for the outer London JOSC meeting this Tuesday at 4pm at Ilford Town Hall on the 9^th April.

I have asked Cllr Zammett, the Chair of the JOSC, for this missing paper to be added to the agenda for the Tuesday JOSC to allow Cllrs and the public to ask questions about these possible PFI deals.

NHS mangers have a duty to consult before making changes to our health service. £49M is to be spent at two hospitals King George and Queens and we do not even know how much is to be spent at each site.

This appears a clear breach of the NHS to consult as set out in the link https://www.eversheds-sutherland.com/global/en/what/articles/index.page?ArticleID=en/Public-sector/The_Public_Law_Duty_to_Consult

I quote

“the governing principle is proportionality of the type and scale of consultation to the potential impacts of the proposal decision being taken, and thought should be given to achieving real engagement rather than following bureaucratic process.”

How can it be a proportionate consultation when we don't know exactly how our money is to spent across two sites. Campaigners go to 10 Downing Street on 3^rd May to ask for the £49M bid document to be published in full along with the distribution list per the event page here https://www.facebook.com/events/343126989892860/

Hopefully, we will not need to go to 10 Downing Street as the papers published at the Stratford meeting says:

“Key stakeholder engagement • The strategic estates plan (SEP) draws together existing plans/information submitted and prepared by each organisation • Key stakeholders commented and reviewed SEP prior to publication in October 2018”

The East London Health & Care Partnership website says:

The East London Health & Care Partnership brings together the area’s eight councils and 12 NHS organisations, who are combining their expertise and resources to ensure health and care services meet the needs of local people, now and in the future.

So it seems certain that Redbridge has a copy of the £49M bid document, consequently I have written to Cllr Athwal on twitter today for a copy of it.

April 1^st Statement by BHRUT saying King George A&E is safe

This statement does not stand scrutiny. Whether King George A&E stays open is not determined by Council Leaders listed in the statement, nor do the local NHS managers listed have the authority to keep open King George A&E.

The power to make this decision lies with the Secretary of State for Health as his recent decision to stop the plans to close two West London A&Es shows. The power could be delegated to The East London Health & Care Partnership, which has not backed the BHRUT statement. It must be reasonable to assume that the original Redbridge Labour press release on this subject was motivated by a desire to bump the save King George A&E march off the TV news the next day. If this was the reason it failed, as the BBC TV news still ran the story on the 30^th March.

Next Planing meeting of Save King George Hospital campaign at midday on Friday 12^th April

We will be meeting at the Redbridge Central Library Cafe in Ilford. It is unusual for more than 6 of us to turn up, so please let me know if you are attending. If the prospect of a PFI deal leads to more interest than usual it would be great if a Councillor could book a room for a meeting at a Town Hall.

Regards

Andy Walker

07956 263088