Health campus questions
WE note the proposals of WHH Foundation Trust to redevelop the Halton site, but we will, of course, oppose any proposals which are not clearly in the best interests of Halton residents, including privatisation of care facilities.
All proposals for this site must provide at least equal (and preferably improved) facilities for both physical/ mental health and wellbeing services; as well as improved Primary Care facilities, including an Urgent Care Centre.
We hope this letter is a useful contribution to the consultation for the new proposals for the Halton Health Campus for WHH.
The proposals, as reported in the Weekly News (February 15), are as follows: the ‘Halton Health Campus’ will comprise ‘multiple general practitioners on site in a ‘ medical plaza,’ a ‘wellness facility’ supporting good physical and mental wellbeing, a bespoke imaging and diagnostics centre, conference facilities and a community centre with cafes, shops and post office’.
The new facility ‘would be dedicated to treatment while secondary services such as rehabilitation would be moved to care homes on site or a short stay rehabilitation centre’. W
hilst these proposals seem exciting in outline; it is essential that more detail is specified to see whether they will fulfil current and future needs, and meets the concerns outlined above.
Whilst we welcome the ‘state of the art’ facilities proposed by the Warrington and Halton Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (WHH) ‘to meet the needs of current and future populations of Halton’ and its surrounds; particularly its focus on good health and wellbeing, we do have some concerns ● over the efficacy these proposals.
Firstly, we do not know whether the funds (£40million) are going to be committed to this project?
There is a concern of about the timescale - currently we do not have one, but there is a commitment to consult during 2018.
The plans contain an outline of the Trust’s proposals, but is lack- ing in detail at this stage.
There is also a concern about how long the medical facilities are to be open.
Would this be 24/7 and if not what are the proposed opening times? This needs to be specified. The new build is proposing to accommodate several GP practices and Mental Health Services, but these surely would be better located in their communities because of the need to accommodate people who do not have their own transport.
We welcome the proposal for extra care facilities, particularly if it includes affordable rents for older and disabled people, but then are concerned about the two care homes being proposed as well (with one being a private provider).
Whilst we recognise the need for additional care homes due to closures elsewhere in the borough, are they going to be most suitably located here?
Consideration should instead be given to increasing the intermediate care and rehabilitation facilities. There is concern also ( Weekly News, February 15 and March 8) that one of the proposed care homes is being provided by a private company.
There should be a clear focus on keeping people healthy, happy and in their own homes.
This is not only a preferred and healthy model, but is also more cost effective.
Perhaps a fitness centre could be added to the proposals with a gym, swimming pool, yoga and pilates as part of the drive to improve people’s general health and wellbeing, or is this what is envisaged in the wellness facility?
Do local GPs approve of these proposals to move to a combined Halton Health Campus?
There is, we understand, a proposal to demolish the Brooker Centre.
Mental Health is a serious issue in Halton.
What are the proposals to replicate this much needed unit?
Will there be sufficient number of in-patient beds? And how does the trust propose to replace the existing beds lost by demolition to the existing hospital?
There is no mention, for example, of medical wards at all in these proposals.
Will there be adequate outpatient facilities? On a different tack: Why the proposals for shops and a post office, when these facilities are currently available in the adjacent Runcorn Shopping City and Trident Park?
This thinking seems a little awry. These proposals, of course, need to be carefully scrutinised by the Health Policy And Performance Board on Halton Council (as we are sure they will be), on behalf of the people of Halton, as part of the consultation process, before these proposals are finalised.
We acknowledge, of course, that it is still early days for these proposals.
We also hope that the WHH will take cognisance of the concerns we have outlined above and that this letter is a useful contribution to the consultation for the new proposals for the Halton Health Campus for WHH
We wish our Halton & Weaver Vale MPs (Derek Twigg and Mike Amesbury) well in their deliberations with WHH. 62 YEARS AGO THE Ministry Of Transport was yet to make a decision on whether to agree to foot the 75% share of the estimated £2m cost of a new bridge.
Many of the more than 6,000 unemployed men in the Liverpool area considered Widnes to be too far away and too expensive to accept work in.
A tour of schools in Widnes by the town’s mayor and mayoress lasting nearly seven days displayed more than 10,000 ‘bright, clean and healthy children’.
A Government minister indicated his consent for a chemical factory to be built at a 44 acre site in Widnes.
Members of the Ball O’ Ditton branch of the Royal British Legion in Widnes honoured their president with two presentations in recognition of his service.
Detectives in Widnes helped uncover a ‘smuggling racket’ as three men were fined for dealing uncustomed watches.