KOHIN
Keep Our Hospital in Norwich
KOHIN - Response to NHS Executive
KoHiN response to assessment of N&N redevelopment strategy by NHS Executive
The points below represent a brief initial response to the letter from the NHS Executive Anglia and Oxford Region dated 12 August 1997.
1. General Comment
The negative NHS response contains no surprises. Acceptance of any one argument put forward by KoHiN would be an admission that the Colney project is flawed. The NHS response underlines the need for a publicly conducted independent expert assessment of the new hospital location.
The NHS assessment shows the city centre redevelopment is a serious option, comparable in cost to Colney.
2. Planning Procedures
Whilst planning and public consultation procedures have met the minimum statutory requirements, information has come to light over the past eighteen months which shows how plans for a single site hospital at Colney were decided in private by the health authorities and hospital consultants and manoeuvred through the planning process.
A single district hospital at Colney was engineered through the planning process on the back of a second district hospital and on the premise that redevelopment of the N&N was not feasible. Relocation of the N&N has not been examined at a public inquiry. The planning inquiry into a second district hospital at Colney in 1988 did not examine closure. John Gummer, Environment Secretary, refused to call in the planning application last summer for political reasons.
3. Costs
The NHS figures show the overall cost of the N&N redevelopment as comparable to Colney, falling within a very narrow margin of £20 million. Taking a wider view, the social, environmental and economic costs of Colney to the community are not reflected in the final figure and are quite unacceptable.
The Government's attitude to "write off" costs verges on the irresponsible. No private sector organisation would move forward to a total replacement strategy without considering the implications of low historical costs against the full impact of current costs.
The NHS Executive ignores an important strand of the KoHiN strategy- that is, two thirds of redevelopment could be achieved for one third of the cost. A decision on whether to replace or refurbish the final one third (i.e. the tower blocks built in 1971 and 1975 ) could be taken at a later date.
any
4. Compensation
In breaking its pre-election commitment to hold a public listening exercise, the Government has sheltered behind breach of a signed contract with huge financial penalties. However, it is clear from discussions with civil servants and the Health Minister that political factors rather than compensation are critical in the Government's decision to press ahead with Colney. The Government has the ability to break a signed contract as demonstrated by the recent case of Exchequer Partnerships, a private firm seeking £1 million in payment arising from the Treasury's abandonment of a contract signed in January for a £200 million redevelopment scheme in Whitehall.
5. Design
NHS Executive arguments in favour of the efficiency of the Colney grid plan do not take account of the fact that the N&N strategy is a concept which could easily be worked up into a design giving similar relationships to the different departments to those at Colney.
6. Phasing and Construction
Whilst refurbishment of the N&N would be carried out over a longer period, it would take place with a surplus of accommodation. Redevelopment would allow a relatively light cost penalty for a change in mind about bed numbers if national health policy were altered and extra beds were required. Additional beds at Colney would involve substantial extra costs.
Two thirds of the N&N could be redeveloped without serious interference to the existing buildings, with the exception of the nurses home. The final phase would be more invasive but no worse than the scale of works which have been carried out over the last few years and which continue to be carried out.
7. Bed Numbers
Bed numbers at Colney are inadequate by the NHS Executive's own admission. Ten percent of patients in the East Norfolk district would be sent to hospitals at King's Lynn, Gorleston and Bury St Edmunds.
Examination of bed numbers at Colney by the Department of Public Health Sciences at St George's Hospital Medical School suggests an increased demand for beds against the background increase in Norfolk's elderly population.
8. Car Parking
The demand for more car parking is a major factor in relocation of the hospital at Colney. Whilst KoHiN acknowledges the need for more parking, we do not consider it as a satisfactory justification for relocation. Demand for parking is not confined to Norwich. Lack of parking is a problem faced by the majority of hospital trusts around the country and is being tackled in situ in a variety of ways.
18 August 1997
"It is the people's national health service and we should never forget that."
(Alan Milburn MP, Minister of State for Health, Hansard 15th May 1997)
"City centres are the places for hospitals."
(John Gummer, recently Minister for the Environment, Bristol 22nd March 1996)