Elected mayors - The plot thickens.
Looks like the Bolton News are not going to publish my overly-long letter copied to my previous blog.
However, todays Bolton News carries another letter on the subject, this time from a Mr P A Williams of Harwood.
Let's have a referendum
I take issue with Alan Calvert’s comment that the “Elected mayor plan is plain daft”.
If the result of the consultation was democratically flawed, then it was undemocratic, and as such the voters deserve a referendum on the matter. He makes a point about the few people that replied in the consultation but surely this was due to the way it was organised.
I haven’t received a Bolton Scene for months, and when I requested a consultation form at my local library I was told they had none and didn’t know they were available. After the Market Hall fiasco, it seems to me that unless any result is to the liking of this council it is rejected.
Councillors are elected to represent their constituents and, on the whole, do this well. But are any of them qualified to run the town? I doubt it, and certainly not part-time.
If any of the existing councillors would like the job of elected mayor they could stand for election, that way all the people of Bolton would have a vote and not just the few ward members who vote for their councillor who then becomes leader. Is that democratic??
So Alan, don’t toe the ruling party line like a ventriloquists’ dummy, speak for the people and champion real democracy.
Mr P A Williams Northwood Harwood
.....................................................................................
Had no response yet to my e-mail to John Denham but I have sight of a response from the Director of the Chief Executives Department at Bolton Council to a similar complaint from another Bolton resident.
After listing the procedures prescribed by the Local Government Act in relation to changing the way the Executive operates, he writes:-
"Despite the above being included within the Act it does not provide either for any specific form of consultation or for any specific consultation period. In addition the department for Communities and Local Government decided not to issue any guidance to Local Authorities as to what the Department considers would constitute 'reasonable steps'. As a result, each Local Authority has had to reach its own decision as to the form and level of public consultation that it considers to be appropriate."
This is simply not true !!!!!!
The predecessor of the Department for Communities and Local Government, i.e. The Department for the Environment, Transport and the Regions, in December 1999 issued the following:-
New Council Constitutions
Consultation Guidelines for English Local Authorities
This can be downloaded in pdf format from the following website.
http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/localgovernment/newcouncilconstitutions3
It is difficult to get past many pages before realising that the consultation organised by Bolton Council comes nowhere near satisfying these guidelines and best practice.
It is worrying that the Director of the Chief Executives Dept is seemingly unaware of this document and it simply re-enforces my cynicism about the Council paying lip service to the requirements of the Act in the hope of pushing through their preferred option of Leader and Cabinet.
I've e-mailed this info to John Denham.
The Council seems to think they are in the clear on this one.
An interesting thought. If the Secretary of State concludes that the consultation was flawed and didn't fulfill the requirements of the Act, does this mean that any subsequent actions by the Council in pursuing their preferred option of Leader & Cabinet through full Council on December 9th and beyond would be 'Ultra Vires'?
This one has still got legs - as they say in the press.
I feel another letter to the Bolton News coming on.
Paul
Wednesday, 25 November 2009
Saturday, 21 November 2009
Elected Mayors - Flawed Consultation
.
I suppose I'm becoming cynical but, having had some experience documented in this blog of Bolton Council's 'Consultations', I was incensed by an article in the Bolton News a few weeks ago where Sean Harris the Chief Executive stated that following the pathetic response to the so called Consultation on the future operation of the Executive of the Council, where the majority were in favour of an elected mayor, they were going to ignore it anyway and go their own sweet way.
I rattled off a letter to the Bolton News which this time round they actually printed. It went as follows.
...................................................................................
Dear Sir
So we are not to have an elected mayor. The powers that be decided to consult the people. Another consultation - this time through Bolton Scene, almost guaranteed to produce a poor numerical response.
Come on, -who reads it? It goes either straight into the recycling bin or the outside toilet. But this suits the purposes of the Town hall, elected or employed. Turkeys just don't vote for Christmas.
Even though a miserable number of 622 people took part in the consultation and even though a majority supported the idea, this was sufficient for it to be ignored. If only 622 people voted in a Council by election then whoever the majority voted for would be elected. What's the difference?
Unfortunately the Council have a track record on arranging consultations which they can then ignore. What about the Market Hall? What about spending £31,500 ripping up a perfectly good footpath in Little Lever that's only been down five years? (Work starts this Sunday).
The existing structure of the Council, with it's executive members for this and that, means that the Councillors elected by Little Lever, irrespective of party, are 'junior' to certain other councillors. Does this mean that they are less able to effectively represent their electors?
The proposed Cabinet structure would only make this situation worse. This is emulating the situation with national Government. It doesn't lend itself to more efficiency, it just means they can do what they want for four or five years.
Why is the Chief Executive, Sean Harris, commenting on this? It's Cliff Morris's job. He is the one who was elected. Who is running this Town hall?
My manifesto for running for elected mayor would be obvious to all and no doubt would be shared, no doubt, by many other of your readers who would want to run.
Competence, Value for money, scrap final salary gold plated inflation proofed pension schemes, scrap all this political correctness stuff, stop translating every document into a dozen different languages, fewer chiefs, more workers, enforce the laws and by-laws without fear or favour, make people do the jobs they are paid to do with our money and don't think you only need to listen to the electors in the three weeks before polling day.
The question of elected mayors should be put to a referendum of registered electors and be independently organised by the Electoral Commission, not left to the whim and fancy of the incumbents who wish to preserve their position.
My points are completely without reference to one party or another, but democracy has to happen every day, not just once a year or once every five years.
End of Letter
.....................................................................................
Since then there have been several other mentions of Elected Mayors in letters and Columns.
First of all Alan Calvert of the Bolton News
.....................................................................................
Unlike some of the people who write letters to this newspaper, I think the idea of an elected Mayor for Bolton is plain daft.
I have said the same thing at various intervals over the years and it pleases me that council leaders dismissed this option after a consultation exercise that provoked little interest or excitement.
Six people used one of the 4,000 leaflets produced by the council and only 35 people returned the tear-off consultation slip contained in 120,000 copies of Bolton Scene, the council newspaper.
Some 622 people took part in a month-long consultation that cost £4,300 and, not surprisingly, more people were in favour of an elected Mayor than against.
The ruling Labour executive, supported by the Conservative and Liberal Democrat opposition parties, chose to ignore this flawed democratic result and concentrate on the other option being pushed by the government — a new-style council leader and executive.
A final decision on whether to adopt this new system will be made by the full council on December 9.
This new leader — presumably Labour’s Cliff Morris — would have more responsibility and that would apply equally to John Walsh (Conservative) and Roger Hayes (Liberal Democrat) if either of those gentlemen were to win the most seats at next year’s election.
Before the decision is taken it would be helpful if the council could spell out the details in full for our benefit.
Would the new-style leader receive a larger allowance and be expected to put in more hours?
Would the same apply to a new executive?
If so, what would the advantages be for those of us who pay council tax?
I am delighted that the elected Mayor idea is dead in the water, but I have yet to be convinced that the alternative change is necessary for the town.
End of article.
.....................................................................................
This prompted a letter from a James Birch of Sharples as follows:-
.....................................................................................
So, Bolton Council have decided that we will not have an elected mayor.
I don’t like to say I told you so, but several weeks ago my letter was published in The Bolton News saying that the decision had already been made by the council and I was proved right.
No, I did not attend any meetings or return any tear-off consultation slip from the Labour Party propaganda paper Bolton Scene which just goes directly into my paper recycle bin
.
As I said before, what’s the point?
I believe that 622 people took part in the consultation which was not sufficient numbers for the council. Could they inform me, and others, how many people would be an acceptable number? 722? 922? 1,022?
If a councillor was elected with a majority of less than 622 I presume that would not be acceptable and a second election would be called.
Dream on!
According to Alan Calvert (The Bolton News, November 9), Labour, Conservative and Liberal Democrats chose to ignore this flawed democratic result.
Is democracy flawed if you don't get the result you want?
It is typical of Bolton Council’s “I know best attitude”.
I look forward to December 9 when the full council will again vote for no change.
End of letter
.....................................................................................
In response to this a letter was published from Peter Johnson as follows:-
.....................................................................................
James Birch complains that a majority of 622 people (0.07% of the electorate) failed to procure an elected executive mayor for Bolton.
In the days when the Labour Movement had more regard for the rules and procedures thanit apparently does now, a major constitutional proposal of this significance would require not merely a simple majority but the support of 75% of all those eligible to vote, it being deemed in the absence of such levels of support that there is insufficient majority for constitutional change
Clearly, most of the population is not in the slightest interested in such a change. Not suprising.
A senior colleague in a Yorkshire Authority said to me a couple of years ago 2 If you are thinking of having an elected mayor, I have one simple word of advice for you - Don't"
"We've got one and you can't keep tabs on the blighter and if we can't keep tabs on him what chance has the ordinary punter?"
Says it all, really.
End of letter.
.....................................................................................
In the meantime I had been researching the background to all this and composed a further letter to the Bolton News which summarised my findings.
I sent this a week ago but so far it hasn't been published. (Hopefully because it was too long, rather than any collusion between the Bolton News and the Council)
The letter went as follows.
.....................................................................................
Dear Sir
Further to my letter of last week about an Elected Mayor for Bolton, a little further research has produced the following points of interest.
The Local government Act of 2000 requires the Council to draw up proposals for the operation of executive arrangements within the Council. They have a choice of two options.
A directly elected Mayor and a Cabinet of up to nine Councillors appointed by that Mayor.
A Leader elected by the Council and a Cabinet of up to nine Councillors not necessarily appointed by the Leader.
Originally there was a third option of Elected Mayor and Council manager but for English Authorities this was removed by a Local Government Act in 2007.
Bolton Council as of today however are still quoting the three options on their Website.
Quote:-
Mayoral referendums
The Local Government Act 2000 set out a major change in the way local authorities in England and Wales are run. Most local authorities, except some of the smaller district councils in the area of a county council, operate 'executive arrangements'. There are three types of executive arrangement set out in the Act, two of which involve a directly elected mayor: mayor and cabinet, and mayor and council manager. The other involves a leader (who is elected by councillors) and cabinet. Local authorities consult on which arrangements local people want. If there is a proposal to have a mayor, the local authority must hold a binding referendum. Many councils in England have already conducted consultations with local people on this issue. Local residents can also require a mayoral referendum by organising a petition signed by 5% of local electors or more (10% or more in Wales).
Unquote.
Before drawing up such proposals, the Act requires that a local authority must take reasonable steps to consult the local government electors for, and other interested persons in, the authority’s area.
The term 'reasonable' is a generic and relative one and applies to that which is appropriate for a particular situation.
There can hardly be a more serious situation than an alteration in way in which we are locally governed by the Council.
This consultation therefore requires a method which will produce the maximum informed response from the 262,400 electors and residents.
The Council has many methods at its disposal of communicating with residents. Again I quote from the Councils Website.
Quote:-
Getting involved
We try to give as many people as possible the opportunity to ‘Speak Up’ and there are a number of different ways of getting involved including area forums, citizens panels, door to door surveys, postal and online questionnaires, telephone interviews and discussion groups.
Local Polls
Local Polls are a form of referendum that Councils can carry out to test public opinion within the borough. Local Polls can take place with the use of traditional polling stations or by all-postal ballot.
Unquote.
The Council chose to conduct its consultation by means of a questionnaire in the September issue of Bolton Scene. As far as I am aware none of the other above options were pursued. Nor as far as I am aware was there any pre-notification of this questionnaire in the Bolton News, the Area Forums, the Council Website or in the Libraries.
Although the Scene is delivered free to 120,000 households there are no statistics as to how many are read or how many go directly into the recycling bin.
There is nothing on the front page of the September issue to say that a most important questionnaire is on page 9. Don't throw this away.!!
The questionnaire produced a extremely poor response of 622 replies. Although a majority of respondents were in favour of an elected Mayor the Council has chosen to disregard the results and are therefore pursuing the Leader and Cabinet option.
The two options were laid out without any attempt to provide information about the consequences of choosing one or the other.
For instance it could have been pointed out that the elected Mayor would be able to appoint any Councillor to his Cabinet as he or she saw fit, irrespective of that Councillors Political allegiance thus possibly putting an end to the dominance of one party or another in the conduct of the Council's business.
The elected Mayor might choose to appoint a Cabinet of all the talents thus utilising the best brains amongst the elected Councillors irrespective of party.
They have not therefore provided in the questionaire sufficient information or detail for the electors to come to a conclusion which might have prompted more people to reply to it.
It is my contention that in using a singular method of consultation without pre-notification and in ill-informing the residents about the different consequences of the two options means that it did not fulfill the requirement of the Act that it was 'reasonable'.
I am writing to the Secretary of State concerned to point this out and it may well be that, should he concur, he will oblige Bolton Council to re-consult.
In any event, if a petition, signed by 5% of the electors of the Borough and asking for a referendum on the matter, can be presented to the Council, then they are obliged to conduct one.
I intend to organise such a petition, on the basis that the proposed method of operation of the Council would only further entrench the waste and incompetence that is described daily in your newspaper and that a new independant broom is required to achieve maximum value for our money and a greater attention being paid to the views of the Boroughs electors.
Those of you of a like mind may care to contact me at 'kathy.maddox@ntlworld.com' or write to me at the address below
Paul Richardson
24 Ripon Close
Little Lever
Bolton
(Dear Editor. I know this is a long letter but the subject matter is of the utmost importance to the residents of Bolton and your readers. I think the Council have contrived to do the minimum to avoid the possibility of an elected Mayor and they are having one over on us - again)
For your convenience I attach the relevant copy of Bolton Scene.
End of letter.
.....................................................................................
By this time, cynical old me suspects that Bolton Council think they have got away with this one, so, I thought in for a penny -in for a pound.
I have thus e-mailed John Denham, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government the following and copied it to Brian Iddon, David Crausby and Ruth Kelly.
(Because I used my unpublished letter above as the main part of the e-mail I have bracketed this.)
.....................................................................................
Attn Mr John Denham
Secretary of State
Department of Communities and Local Government
Dear Sir,
May I bring to your attention a matter related to the statutory requirement in the Local Government Act of 2000 for Local Authorities to carry our a reasonable consultation with local government electors and other interested parties before drawing up proposals for changes in the way in which the Executive operates.
In the case of Bolton Metropolitan Authority it is my contention that this requirement has not been fulfilled.
My reasons for arriving at this conclusion are contained in a letter which I have written to the Bolton News (so far unpublished) which I copy for you below.
(BODY OF LETTER TO BOLTON NEWS)
To further re-inforce my point might I draw your attention to a definition of 'consultation'
Public consultation, or simply consultation, is a regulatory process by which the public's input on matters affecting them is sought. Its main goals are in improving the efficiency, transparency and public involvement in large-scale projects or laws and policies. It usually involves notification (to publicise the matter to be consulted on), consultation (a two-way flow of information and opinion exchange) as well as participation (involving interest groups in the drafting of policy or legislation.
The process is typical of Commonwealth countries such as the United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand or Australia.
Incidentally when I down loaded the 'Petitioning for elected mayor - information pack' from your website, this is also still quoting the three options.
I would be grateful if you would examine the situation in relation to Bolton Council's handling of this matter and form a judgement as to whether they had satisfied the requirements of the Act.
It is obvious that Bolton Council ( or any other for that matter) would have a vested interest in not wanting an elected mayor which is why, presumably, the requirement for reasonable consultation was incorporated into the Act.
At the moment it seems that Bolton Council have only paid lip service to their statutary duty and have conducted and concluded the business with indecent haste.
Yours sincerely - etc
End of e-mail.
.....................................................................................
Let's see if that does anything !!!!
In regard to the Bolton News. I am becoming increasingly worried and irritated with the watered down reports and comments that it is producing which are not reflecting the frustrations and anger of many residents on many subjects - particularly related to the activities of the Council.
I have therefore just written a letter (yet to be published) based on a report in the Daily Mail this week.
It goes as follows.
.....................................................................................
Dear Sir,
Perhaps your readers would be interested in the recent comments of The Lord Chief Justice, Lord Judge, to the Conference of the Society of Editors.
He said that people should get their information about what local Councils are doing from independent sources.
Quote "I don't want the proceedings of the local Council to be reported to the public by an employee of that Council." Unquote
He further said that local papers that used to report fully on what town halls are doing have been weakened by the recession and the growth of the internet and in some cases Councils have launched their own expensively produced papers to rival the independent press.
In addition he said that some local weekly newspapers are relying on Council press officers for the information they print. Quote " If that is true it should send a shiver down all our spines. Unquote.
I am sure that the Bolton News is not one of these papers. If it is not already, the Bolton News should be the major campaigning organ holding the Council to account in terms of prudence, efficiency and competence. In the unlikely event that anyone ever read the Bolton Scene they would think that everything in the Bolton garden was lovely - as opposed to the reality that it is not.
By all means the Council are entitled to publicise its achievements but it should also honestly own up to its shortcomings, the catalogue of which grows longer by the week.
The public would respect them more for that.
As Lord Judge said - 'Spin is neither a cornerstone or a bulwark of a free society'.
End of letter.
.....................................................................................
It may well be that should a referendum of all the electors of Bolton be held then the majority would reject the option of an elected mayor and opt instead for the Leader and Cabinet. If that was the case - fine!!
The point is we don't know.
The Council don't know.
We ought to know and that would be the end of the matter.
The Government have, to their credit, done a survey about the attitudes of the public to elected mayors, Councils, Local democracy and the like. It makes interesting reading. There are 91 pages, well laid out which I'm certainly not going to reproduce here but the link for those interested is:-
http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/localgovernment/pdf/154842.pdf
Good reading to you all.
For your info I copy the questionnaire ex Sept Bolton Scene
.....................................................................................
How the councilmakes decisions
Do you want an Elected Mayor or a Leader?
The way the council makes decisions will change next year. And voters will have a
big say about what happens
New national legislation – the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health
Act 2007 – means the council has to change the way it is governed by May next year. It also has to ask residents what they think of the different systems of government on offer and which they prefer.
At present the council is governed by a leader and an executive. The full council (a meeting where all councillors can attend) decides who the leader is and who the members of the executive are and their roles and responsibilities.
The system was introduced in 2000 following national legislation to change the old
committee model of government. Whichever system is introduced, voters will still elect councillors to represent them and their area. Now the council is asking for people’s views about the following two options by October 4. Based on these views the council will have to make a decision about which method it chooses by the end of the year. The new system will have to be introduced by May.
Please fill in the form opposite and return to us by freepost. For further information visit our website: www.bolton.gov.uk where you can also make your comments.
If you require additional forms for other members of your household, these can be collected from your local library or you can complete the form online.
The Elected Mayor
• A mayor elected by voters every four years
• The elected mayor does not represent a ward
• The mayor is not a councillor
• Between two and nine councillors appointed to the executive by the elected mayor
• The elected mayor decides the roles and responsibilities of the executive members
• The executive submits the budget and strategic policies to the full council which can only amend or overturn the policies by a two-thirds majority • The civic role of the mayor would have to be discussed
The ‘new style’ Leader and cabinet
• A councillor is elected as leader of the executive for up to four years by the full council
• The length of term of the leader is decided by how long is left until she or he has to stand for election again
• Between two and nine councillors are appointed to the executive by the leader
• The leader appoints a deputy leader to act on their behalf when necessary
• The leader decides the roles and responsibilities of the executive members
• The executive submits the budget and strategic policies to the full council which can amend or overturn them by a majority
Questionnaire;
Which option would you prefer for Bolton?
Please tick one box only.
The Elected Mayor
The ‘new style’ Leader and cabinet
Why? (Please write your comments in the box below)
Name: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Postcode: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Signature: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.................................................................................
Cheers - Paul
I suppose I'm becoming cynical but, having had some experience documented in this blog of Bolton Council's 'Consultations', I was incensed by an article in the Bolton News a few weeks ago where Sean Harris the Chief Executive stated that following the pathetic response to the so called Consultation on the future operation of the Executive of the Council, where the majority were in favour of an elected mayor, they were going to ignore it anyway and go their own sweet way.
I rattled off a letter to the Bolton News which this time round they actually printed. It went as follows.
...................................................................................
Dear Sir
So we are not to have an elected mayor. The powers that be decided to consult the people. Another consultation - this time through Bolton Scene, almost guaranteed to produce a poor numerical response.
Come on, -who reads it? It goes either straight into the recycling bin or the outside toilet. But this suits the purposes of the Town hall, elected or employed. Turkeys just don't vote for Christmas.
Even though a miserable number of 622 people took part in the consultation and even though a majority supported the idea, this was sufficient for it to be ignored. If only 622 people voted in a Council by election then whoever the majority voted for would be elected. What's the difference?
Unfortunately the Council have a track record on arranging consultations which they can then ignore. What about the Market Hall? What about spending £31,500 ripping up a perfectly good footpath in Little Lever that's only been down five years? (Work starts this Sunday).
The existing structure of the Council, with it's executive members for this and that, means that the Councillors elected by Little Lever, irrespective of party, are 'junior' to certain other councillors. Does this mean that they are less able to effectively represent their electors?
The proposed Cabinet structure would only make this situation worse. This is emulating the situation with national Government. It doesn't lend itself to more efficiency, it just means they can do what they want for four or five years.
Why is the Chief Executive, Sean Harris, commenting on this? It's Cliff Morris's job. He is the one who was elected. Who is running this Town hall?
My manifesto for running for elected mayor would be obvious to all and no doubt would be shared, no doubt, by many other of your readers who would want to run.
Competence, Value for money, scrap final salary gold plated inflation proofed pension schemes, scrap all this political correctness stuff, stop translating every document into a dozen different languages, fewer chiefs, more workers, enforce the laws and by-laws without fear or favour, make people do the jobs they are paid to do with our money and don't think you only need to listen to the electors in the three weeks before polling day.
The question of elected mayors should be put to a referendum of registered electors and be independently organised by the Electoral Commission, not left to the whim and fancy of the incumbents who wish to preserve their position.
My points are completely without reference to one party or another, but democracy has to happen every day, not just once a year or once every five years.
End of Letter
.....................................................................................
Since then there have been several other mentions of Elected Mayors in letters and Columns.
First of all Alan Calvert of the Bolton News
.....................................................................................
Unlike some of the people who write letters to this newspaper, I think the idea of an elected Mayor for Bolton is plain daft.
I have said the same thing at various intervals over the years and it pleases me that council leaders dismissed this option after a consultation exercise that provoked little interest or excitement.
Six people used one of the 4,000 leaflets produced by the council and only 35 people returned the tear-off consultation slip contained in 120,000 copies of Bolton Scene, the council newspaper.
Some 622 people took part in a month-long consultation that cost £4,300 and, not surprisingly, more people were in favour of an elected Mayor than against.
The ruling Labour executive, supported by the Conservative and Liberal Democrat opposition parties, chose to ignore this flawed democratic result and concentrate on the other option being pushed by the government — a new-style council leader and executive.
A final decision on whether to adopt this new system will be made by the full council on December 9.
This new leader — presumably Labour’s Cliff Morris — would have more responsibility and that would apply equally to John Walsh (Conservative) and Roger Hayes (Liberal Democrat) if either of those gentlemen were to win the most seats at next year’s election.
Before the decision is taken it would be helpful if the council could spell out the details in full for our benefit.
Would the new-style leader receive a larger allowance and be expected to put in more hours?
Would the same apply to a new executive?
If so, what would the advantages be for those of us who pay council tax?
I am delighted that the elected Mayor idea is dead in the water, but I have yet to be convinced that the alternative change is necessary for the town.
End of article.
.....................................................................................
This prompted a letter from a James Birch of Sharples as follows:-
.....................................................................................
So, Bolton Council have decided that we will not have an elected mayor.
I don’t like to say I told you so, but several weeks ago my letter was published in The Bolton News saying that the decision had already been made by the council and I was proved right.
No, I did not attend any meetings or return any tear-off consultation slip from the Labour Party propaganda paper Bolton Scene which just goes directly into my paper recycle bin
.
As I said before, what’s the point?
I believe that 622 people took part in the consultation which was not sufficient numbers for the council. Could they inform me, and others, how many people would be an acceptable number? 722? 922? 1,022?
If a councillor was elected with a majority of less than 622 I presume that would not be acceptable and a second election would be called.
Dream on!
According to Alan Calvert (The Bolton News, November 9), Labour, Conservative and Liberal Democrats chose to ignore this flawed democratic result.
Is democracy flawed if you don't get the result you want?
It is typical of Bolton Council’s “I know best attitude”.
I look forward to December 9 when the full council will again vote for no change.
End of letter
.....................................................................................
In response to this a letter was published from Peter Johnson as follows:-
.....................................................................................
James Birch complains that a majority of 622 people (0.07% of the electorate) failed to procure an elected executive mayor for Bolton.
In the days when the Labour Movement had more regard for the rules and procedures thanit apparently does now, a major constitutional proposal of this significance would require not merely a simple majority but the support of 75% of all those eligible to vote, it being deemed in the absence of such levels of support that there is insufficient majority for constitutional change
Clearly, most of the population is not in the slightest interested in such a change. Not suprising.
A senior colleague in a Yorkshire Authority said to me a couple of years ago 2 If you are thinking of having an elected mayor, I have one simple word of advice for you - Don't"
"We've got one and you can't keep tabs on the blighter and if we can't keep tabs on him what chance has the ordinary punter?"
Says it all, really.
End of letter.
.....................................................................................
In the meantime I had been researching the background to all this and composed a further letter to the Bolton News which summarised my findings.
I sent this a week ago but so far it hasn't been published. (Hopefully because it was too long, rather than any collusion between the Bolton News and the Council)
The letter went as follows.
.....................................................................................
Dear Sir
Further to my letter of last week about an Elected Mayor for Bolton, a little further research has produced the following points of interest.
The Local government Act of 2000 requires the Council to draw up proposals for the operation of executive arrangements within the Council. They have a choice of two options.
A directly elected Mayor and a Cabinet of up to nine Councillors appointed by that Mayor.
A Leader elected by the Council and a Cabinet of up to nine Councillors not necessarily appointed by the Leader.
Originally there was a third option of Elected Mayor and Council manager but for English Authorities this was removed by a Local Government Act in 2007.
Bolton Council as of today however are still quoting the three options on their Website.
Quote:-
Mayoral referendums
The Local Government Act 2000 set out a major change in the way local authorities in England and Wales are run. Most local authorities, except some of the smaller district councils in the area of a county council, operate 'executive arrangements'. There are three types of executive arrangement set out in the Act, two of which involve a directly elected mayor: mayor and cabinet, and mayor and council manager. The other involves a leader (who is elected by councillors) and cabinet. Local authorities consult on which arrangements local people want. If there is a proposal to have a mayor, the local authority must hold a binding referendum. Many councils in England have already conducted consultations with local people on this issue. Local residents can also require a mayoral referendum by organising a petition signed by 5% of local electors or more (10% or more in Wales).
Unquote.
Before drawing up such proposals, the Act requires that a local authority must take reasonable steps to consult the local government electors for, and other interested persons in, the authority’s area.
The term 'reasonable' is a generic and relative one and applies to that which is appropriate for a particular situation.
There can hardly be a more serious situation than an alteration in way in which we are locally governed by the Council.
This consultation therefore requires a method which will produce the maximum informed response from the 262,400 electors and residents.
The Council has many methods at its disposal of communicating with residents. Again I quote from the Councils Website.
Quote:-
Getting involved
We try to give as many people as possible the opportunity to ‘Speak Up’ and there are a number of different ways of getting involved including area forums, citizens panels, door to door surveys, postal and online questionnaires, telephone interviews and discussion groups.
Local Polls
Local Polls are a form of referendum that Councils can carry out to test public opinion within the borough. Local Polls can take place with the use of traditional polling stations or by all-postal ballot.
Unquote.
The Council chose to conduct its consultation by means of a questionnaire in the September issue of Bolton Scene. As far as I am aware none of the other above options were pursued. Nor as far as I am aware was there any pre-notification of this questionnaire in the Bolton News, the Area Forums, the Council Website or in the Libraries.
Although the Scene is delivered free to 120,000 households there are no statistics as to how many are read or how many go directly into the recycling bin.
There is nothing on the front page of the September issue to say that a most important questionnaire is on page 9. Don't throw this away.!!
The questionnaire produced a extremely poor response of 622 replies. Although a majority of respondents were in favour of an elected Mayor the Council has chosen to disregard the results and are therefore pursuing the Leader and Cabinet option.
The two options were laid out without any attempt to provide information about the consequences of choosing one or the other.
For instance it could have been pointed out that the elected Mayor would be able to appoint any Councillor to his Cabinet as he or she saw fit, irrespective of that Councillors Political allegiance thus possibly putting an end to the dominance of one party or another in the conduct of the Council's business.
The elected Mayor might choose to appoint a Cabinet of all the talents thus utilising the best brains amongst the elected Councillors irrespective of party.
They have not therefore provided in the questionaire sufficient information or detail for the electors to come to a conclusion which might have prompted more people to reply to it.
It is my contention that in using a singular method of consultation without pre-notification and in ill-informing the residents about the different consequences of the two options means that it did not fulfill the requirement of the Act that it was 'reasonable'.
I am writing to the Secretary of State concerned to point this out and it may well be that, should he concur, he will oblige Bolton Council to re-consult.
In any event, if a petition, signed by 5% of the electors of the Borough and asking for a referendum on the matter, can be presented to the Council, then they are obliged to conduct one.
I intend to organise such a petition, on the basis that the proposed method of operation of the Council would only further entrench the waste and incompetence that is described daily in your newspaper and that a new independant broom is required to achieve maximum value for our money and a greater attention being paid to the views of the Boroughs electors.
Those of you of a like mind may care to contact me at 'kathy.maddox@ntlworld.com' or write to me at the address below
Paul Richardson
24 Ripon Close
Little Lever
Bolton
(Dear Editor. I know this is a long letter but the subject matter is of the utmost importance to the residents of Bolton and your readers. I think the Council have contrived to do the minimum to avoid the possibility of an elected Mayor and they are having one over on us - again)
For your convenience I attach the relevant copy of Bolton Scene.
End of letter.
.....................................................................................
By this time, cynical old me suspects that Bolton Council think they have got away with this one, so, I thought in for a penny -in for a pound.
I have thus e-mailed John Denham, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government the following and copied it to Brian Iddon, David Crausby and Ruth Kelly.
(Because I used my unpublished letter above as the main part of the e-mail I have bracketed this.)
.....................................................................................
Attn Mr John Denham
Secretary of State
Department of Communities and Local Government
Dear Sir,
May I bring to your attention a matter related to the statutory requirement in the Local Government Act of 2000 for Local Authorities to carry our a reasonable consultation with local government electors and other interested parties before drawing up proposals for changes in the way in which the Executive operates.
In the case of Bolton Metropolitan Authority it is my contention that this requirement has not been fulfilled.
My reasons for arriving at this conclusion are contained in a letter which I have written to the Bolton News (so far unpublished) which I copy for you below.
(BODY OF LETTER TO BOLTON NEWS)
To further re-inforce my point might I draw your attention to a definition of 'consultation'
Public consultation, or simply consultation, is a regulatory process by which the public's input on matters affecting them is sought. Its main goals are in improving the efficiency, transparency and public involvement in large-scale projects or laws and policies. It usually involves notification (to publicise the matter to be consulted on), consultation (a two-way flow of information and opinion exchange) as well as participation (involving interest groups in the drafting of policy or legislation.
The process is typical of Commonwealth countries such as the United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand or Australia.
Incidentally when I down loaded the 'Petitioning for elected mayor - information pack' from your website, this is also still quoting the three options.
I would be grateful if you would examine the situation in relation to Bolton Council's handling of this matter and form a judgement as to whether they had satisfied the requirements of the Act.
It is obvious that Bolton Council ( or any other for that matter) would have a vested interest in not wanting an elected mayor which is why, presumably, the requirement for reasonable consultation was incorporated into the Act.
At the moment it seems that Bolton Council have only paid lip service to their statutary duty and have conducted and concluded the business with indecent haste.
Yours sincerely - etc
End of e-mail.
.....................................................................................
Let's see if that does anything !!!!
In regard to the Bolton News. I am becoming increasingly worried and irritated with the watered down reports and comments that it is producing which are not reflecting the frustrations and anger of many residents on many subjects - particularly related to the activities of the Council.
I have therefore just written a letter (yet to be published) based on a report in the Daily Mail this week.
It goes as follows.
.....................................................................................
Dear Sir,
Perhaps your readers would be interested in the recent comments of The Lord Chief Justice, Lord Judge, to the Conference of the Society of Editors.
He said that people should get their information about what local Councils are doing from independent sources.
Quote "I don't want the proceedings of the local Council to be reported to the public by an employee of that Council." Unquote
He further said that local papers that used to report fully on what town halls are doing have been weakened by the recession and the growth of the internet and in some cases Councils have launched their own expensively produced papers to rival the independent press.
In addition he said that some local weekly newspapers are relying on Council press officers for the information they print. Quote " If that is true it should send a shiver down all our spines. Unquote.
I am sure that the Bolton News is not one of these papers. If it is not already, the Bolton News should be the major campaigning organ holding the Council to account in terms of prudence, efficiency and competence. In the unlikely event that anyone ever read the Bolton Scene they would think that everything in the Bolton garden was lovely - as opposed to the reality that it is not.
By all means the Council are entitled to publicise its achievements but it should also honestly own up to its shortcomings, the catalogue of which grows longer by the week.
The public would respect them more for that.
As Lord Judge said - 'Spin is neither a cornerstone or a bulwark of a free society'.
End of letter.
.....................................................................................
It may well be that should a referendum of all the electors of Bolton be held then the majority would reject the option of an elected mayor and opt instead for the Leader and Cabinet. If that was the case - fine!!
The point is we don't know.
The Council don't know.
We ought to know and that would be the end of the matter.
The Government have, to their credit, done a survey about the attitudes of the public to elected mayors, Councils, Local democracy and the like. It makes interesting reading. There are 91 pages, well laid out which I'm certainly not going to reproduce here but the link for those interested is:-
http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/localgovernment/pdf/154842.pdf
Good reading to you all.
For your info I copy the questionnaire ex Sept Bolton Scene
.....................................................................................
How the councilmakes decisions
Do you want an Elected Mayor or a Leader?
The way the council makes decisions will change next year. And voters will have a
big say about what happens
New national legislation – the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health
Act 2007 – means the council has to change the way it is governed by May next year. It also has to ask residents what they think of the different systems of government on offer and which they prefer.
At present the council is governed by a leader and an executive. The full council (a meeting where all councillors can attend) decides who the leader is and who the members of the executive are and their roles and responsibilities.
The system was introduced in 2000 following national legislation to change the old
committee model of government. Whichever system is introduced, voters will still elect councillors to represent them and their area. Now the council is asking for people’s views about the following two options by October 4. Based on these views the council will have to make a decision about which method it chooses by the end of the year. The new system will have to be introduced by May.
Please fill in the form opposite and return to us by freepost. For further information visit our website: www.bolton.gov.uk where you can also make your comments.
If you require additional forms for other members of your household, these can be collected from your local library or you can complete the form online.
The Elected Mayor
• A mayor elected by voters every four years
• The elected mayor does not represent a ward
• The mayor is not a councillor
• Between two and nine councillors appointed to the executive by the elected mayor
• The elected mayor decides the roles and responsibilities of the executive members
• The executive submits the budget and strategic policies to the full council which can only amend or overturn the policies by a two-thirds majority • The civic role of the mayor would have to be discussed
The ‘new style’ Leader and cabinet
• A councillor is elected as leader of the executive for up to four years by the full council
• The length of term of the leader is decided by how long is left until she or he has to stand for election again
• Between two and nine councillors are appointed to the executive by the leader
• The leader appoints a deputy leader to act on their behalf when necessary
• The leader decides the roles and responsibilities of the executive members
• The executive submits the budget and strategic policies to the full council which can amend or overturn them by a majority
Questionnaire;
Which option would you prefer for Bolton?
Please tick one box only.
The Elected Mayor
The ‘new style’ Leader and cabinet
Why? (Please write your comments in the box below)
Name: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Postcode: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Signature: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.................................................................................
Cheers - Paul
Monday, 16 November 2009
Updates
Not blogged for ages.
Pressure of work - staff shortages - but mainly because my burning issues have been in a bit of a flux. Anyway, things have settled down a bit so I'll try and update.
THE VILLAGE CENTRE
Finally got some response from Bolton Council re the spending of the £50k. Councillor John Byrne, the Executive Member who had signed off the spending proposals, had promised a review of the spending and a meeting was duly held between the Councillors and the Officers.
The upshot of this was that the block paving remained but signage and planters were to be included. Paula Connor, the Project Officer, subsequently attended a meeting of 'Love Little Lever' to make a presentation and immediately before this meeting had the conducted tour and was reminded of the Councils own projects within the Little Lever Action Plan, only two of which have definitely been concluded in the three and a half years since it started.
This same presentation was given to Public at the Area Forum meeting on 9th November.
I think that the Town Hall acknowledges that the consultation on this had been inadequate and it's just a pity that pressure hadn't been applied some six months before it actually was.
By this time the block paving had been started and should be completed within the next two or three weeks.
So -a battle lost in one sense, but we've still got the rest of the war to fight.
The Councillors and officers are looking towards the next amount of £50k from the District Improvement Fund due in 2011/1012. This time round, they have promised the proper consultation that didn't happen last time.
Personally I don't think there will be another £50k. Is it just me or do people not realise the scale of cutbacks that face the Public Sector after this current spending round?. I project that between 10 and 15% will be the order of things and District Improvement Funds of £100k per year across the four townships will be high up on the list of candidates. Same arguments apply to the Health Centre and the new Magistrates Court which has also been delayed.
Putting the £50k for this year behind us, there are still things that can and must be done before March of next year. The first three of these are and should be easy to achieve.
1) The repainting of the Walls
2) Moving the re-cycling bins
3) Getting serious about the ongoing litter and small scale anti-social behaviour. CCTV - Remember? -Fifty Thousand Pounds worth - Who's using it????
The Precinct buildings are still the main sticking point. I have said repeatedly that until the owners in person are identified - the people who 'own the money' (or not, as the case may be) - then there is no prospect of stopping the ongoing unacceptable dilapidation of the main feature of the Centre.
I have identified the Management Company for the Precinct as being Winex Services Ltd, which has been established for 14 years. These are the people the Council have been speaking to and who have said that they don't propose to spend any money, at least not this year.
The company's registered address is 8 RODBOROUGH ROAD LONDON NW11 8RY.
The directors are Ian Anthony Gilbert and Solomon Jakobowitz and a former director is Victor Winegarten.
The Councils 'contact' for the Precinct is Solomon at Winex Services and both Solomon and Victor are the people whom some of the Precinct tenants are in touch with.
The financial reports for Winex preclude this company from being the owner of the Precinct.
As I have said previously the 'Owners' of the Precinct, according to the Land Registry, are Miller Ltd - registered in Gibraltar. It may well be that Miller has the same directors as Winex. Anyway, by tomorrow, when I receive the Profile of this company from Companies House in Gibraltar, all will become a little clearer.
The main question is - do these guys have any money?. If they haven't and are up to their eyeballs with the mortagage company then fine - we know where we stand. If they have, then the Council must come to some arrangement with them to persuade them, or compel them, or enter into partnership with them to get something done to the place.
An interesting point:- Paula Connor has come up with a map from the Highways Department which shows that although the Precinct Square is private property is has been 'Adopted' by the Council as a Public Highway and so this removes the anomaly of the Council spending money on private land. Indeed, the subsided flags have been re-laid since my last Blog.
Just as an aside, the same map reminds us that all the properties from the Village Chippy up to and including the Co-op (R.I.P) orginally had little gardens or 'pallasadins' (spelled wrong) in front and the first three feet or so of the pavement remains private property.
Blog updates still to come. The Health Centre, Love Little Lever and my new burning issue - Elected Mayors
Paul
Pressure of work - staff shortages - but mainly because my burning issues have been in a bit of a flux. Anyway, things have settled down a bit so I'll try and update.
THE VILLAGE CENTRE
Finally got some response from Bolton Council re the spending of the £50k. Councillor John Byrne, the Executive Member who had signed off the spending proposals, had promised a review of the spending and a meeting was duly held between the Councillors and the Officers.
The upshot of this was that the block paving remained but signage and planters were to be included. Paula Connor, the Project Officer, subsequently attended a meeting of 'Love Little Lever' to make a presentation and immediately before this meeting had the conducted tour and was reminded of the Councils own projects within the Little Lever Action Plan, only two of which have definitely been concluded in the three and a half years since it started.
This same presentation was given to Public at the Area Forum meeting on 9th November.
I think that the Town Hall acknowledges that the consultation on this had been inadequate and it's just a pity that pressure hadn't been applied some six months before it actually was.
By this time the block paving had been started and should be completed within the next two or three weeks.
So -a battle lost in one sense, but we've still got the rest of the war to fight.
The Councillors and officers are looking towards the next amount of £50k from the District Improvement Fund due in 2011/1012. This time round, they have promised the proper consultation that didn't happen last time.
Personally I don't think there will be another £50k. Is it just me or do people not realise the scale of cutbacks that face the Public Sector after this current spending round?. I project that between 10 and 15% will be the order of things and District Improvement Funds of £100k per year across the four townships will be high up on the list of candidates. Same arguments apply to the Health Centre and the new Magistrates Court which has also been delayed.
Putting the £50k for this year behind us, there are still things that can and must be done before March of next year. The first three of these are and should be easy to achieve.
1) The repainting of the Walls
2) Moving the re-cycling bins
3) Getting serious about the ongoing litter and small scale anti-social behaviour. CCTV - Remember? -Fifty Thousand Pounds worth - Who's using it????
The Precinct buildings are still the main sticking point. I have said repeatedly that until the owners in person are identified - the people who 'own the money' (or not, as the case may be) - then there is no prospect of stopping the ongoing unacceptable dilapidation of the main feature of the Centre.
I have identified the Management Company for the Precinct as being Winex Services Ltd, which has been established for 14 years. These are the people the Council have been speaking to and who have said that they don't propose to spend any money, at least not this year.
The company's registered address is 8 RODBOROUGH ROAD LONDON NW11 8RY.
The directors are Ian Anthony Gilbert and Solomon Jakobowitz and a former director is Victor Winegarten.
The Councils 'contact' for the Precinct is Solomon at Winex Services and both Solomon and Victor are the people whom some of the Precinct tenants are in touch with.
The financial reports for Winex preclude this company from being the owner of the Precinct.
As I have said previously the 'Owners' of the Precinct, according to the Land Registry, are Miller Ltd - registered in Gibraltar. It may well be that Miller has the same directors as Winex. Anyway, by tomorrow, when I receive the Profile of this company from Companies House in Gibraltar, all will become a little clearer.
The main question is - do these guys have any money?. If they haven't and are up to their eyeballs with the mortagage company then fine - we know where we stand. If they have, then the Council must come to some arrangement with them to persuade them, or compel them, or enter into partnership with them to get something done to the place.
An interesting point:- Paula Connor has come up with a map from the Highways Department which shows that although the Precinct Square is private property is has been 'Adopted' by the Council as a Public Highway and so this removes the anomaly of the Council spending money on private land. Indeed, the subsided flags have been re-laid since my last Blog.
Just as an aside, the same map reminds us that all the properties from the Village Chippy up to and including the Co-op (R.I.P) orginally had little gardens or 'pallasadins' (spelled wrong) in front and the first three feet or so of the pavement remains private property.
Blog updates still to come. The Health Centre, Love Little Lever and my new burning issue - Elected Mayors
Paul
Wednesday, 7 October 2009
Little Lever Health Centre. Public Meeting
Well, what a night as they say. Got there early and wondered if I was in the right place. Thrashing it down with rain. This, together with the fact that the Bolton News, when it printed my letter yesterday, added that the meeting was tomorrow ( i.e today) was probably responsible for extremely poor attendance.
Nevertheless, I thought it was a well ordered, informative and useful meeting.
In attendance was Dr Brian Iddon, MP for Bolton South East, the Propective Labour Party Parliamentary Candidate for the area when he retires, Ms Yasmin Qureshi, and
the Propective Liberal Democrat Party Parliamentary Candidate for the area, Mr Donal O'Hanlon.
At the top table were Councillors Tony Connell, Mary Woodward and Sean Hornby.
Also present was a reporter from the Bolton News and I look forward with relish to her report. (Hopefully tomorrow)
Councillor Hornby informed the meeting of the state of dilapidation of the building structure, the dampness and mould and slug trails on the carpets, the inadequacy of the heating and ventilation systems the fact that doctors had offered even to repaint their own surgeries and that some of the staff had refused for a period of time to work in the building.
Much discussion took place about the order of priority of the building of the remaining six health centres which has recently been reviewed putting Little Lever fourth. The points system used for this seems to be about health deprivation andis ignoring the physical condition of the existing buildings of which Little Lever is without doubt the worst.
Dr Iddon then gave a general background to the purpose of the new health centres.
Certain other things became clearer from the contributions to the meeting.
Where were the doctors?
Answer -Apparently they have been instructed not to involve themselves with any meeting of this kind or comment on the problem.
Where were the staff? Ditto.
Dr Iddon said that he received many representations from GPs in the Farnworth Area about their Health Centre but had received no representation from Little Lever Doctors.
Dr Iddon was suprised to hear that the three health centres that have been built are struggling to rent out some of their rooms. To Let notices are in the windows.
Who are the Public/Private Partnership Company ( BRAHM LIFT) accountable to?
Answer - BRAHM LIFT Strategic Partnering Board. This Board comprises membership of:
The Eric Wright Group
Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council
Bolton PCT
Bolton Hospitals NHS Trust
Bolton, Salford and Trafford Mental Health Trust
Heywood Middleton and Rochdale PCT
Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council
Pennine Care NHS Trust
Pennine Acute Hospitals NHS Trust
Northwest Ambulance Service
In other words they are accountable to themselves.
Who is the representative of the Bolton Council on this Board?
Answer - We don't know but we'll find out.
Mr O'Hanlan suggested that the Leadership of Bolton Council should take a major stand with the PCT leaving them in no doubt of the unsatisfactory state of affairs.
Dr Iddon had earlier explained that the creation of these new 'Mini Hospitals' was with a view to making the extra health services to do with Physiotherapy, Podiatry, Mental Health etc etc available locally - thus taking the pressure off the Royal Bolton Hospital. This is why the increase in size was required.
There is some doubt as to what services are currently provided at Little Lever and what are likely to be provided in the future at the new Centre.
A point was made that the new health centre at Little Lever would cost £7million to build but the problem was that the building would be leased back by Bolton PCT for £1million per year for 25 years. ------ £25,000,000 !!!!!!!!!!
A further point was that in view of the fact that it is unlikely that the health centre would be built before 2015 -if at all - then a quicker, more cost effective and more satisfactory solution would be the extend the current building to the back of the car park (thus approximately doubling it's size as required) and a complete refurbishment to a modern standard. This surely could be done for a couple of million quid.
Other points were made, one in particular being that the PCT had a duty under the Health protection rules for the safety and working conditions for the Doctors and Staff and a Risk Assessment and a mandatory survey of working conditions ought to be in existence - but it isn't
I hope this is a fair summary of what went on.
Although mention was made of patients from outside the area being treated at the centre, one thing that wasn't discussed was the abysmal situation with appointments.
Dr Iddon did say that the worst health situation in the Borough was in Farnworth ( which is where most of the outside patients are coming from)
Anyway - nil desperandum
Latest news - Dr Iddon, who admitted he hadn't been in the health centre for quite some time is hopefully making a Papal Visit there tomorrow morning.
Bless all our deliberations - Paul
Nevertheless, I thought it was a well ordered, informative and useful meeting.
In attendance was Dr Brian Iddon, MP for Bolton South East, the Propective Labour Party Parliamentary Candidate for the area when he retires, Ms Yasmin Qureshi, and
the Propective Liberal Democrat Party Parliamentary Candidate for the area, Mr Donal O'Hanlon.
At the top table were Councillors Tony Connell, Mary Woodward and Sean Hornby.
Also present was a reporter from the Bolton News and I look forward with relish to her report. (Hopefully tomorrow)
Councillor Hornby informed the meeting of the state of dilapidation of the building structure, the dampness and mould and slug trails on the carpets, the inadequacy of the heating and ventilation systems the fact that doctors had offered even to repaint their own surgeries and that some of the staff had refused for a period of time to work in the building.
Much discussion took place about the order of priority of the building of the remaining six health centres which has recently been reviewed putting Little Lever fourth. The points system used for this seems to be about health deprivation andis ignoring the physical condition of the existing buildings of which Little Lever is without doubt the worst.
Dr Iddon then gave a general background to the purpose of the new health centres.
Certain other things became clearer from the contributions to the meeting.
Where were the doctors?
Answer -Apparently they have been instructed not to involve themselves with any meeting of this kind or comment on the problem.
Where were the staff? Ditto.
Dr Iddon said that he received many representations from GPs in the Farnworth Area about their Health Centre but had received no representation from Little Lever Doctors.
Dr Iddon was suprised to hear that the three health centres that have been built are struggling to rent out some of their rooms. To Let notices are in the windows.
Who are the Public/Private Partnership Company ( BRAHM LIFT) accountable to?
Answer - BRAHM LIFT Strategic Partnering Board. This Board comprises membership of:
The Eric Wright Group
Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council
Bolton PCT
Bolton Hospitals NHS Trust
Bolton, Salford and Trafford Mental Health Trust
Heywood Middleton and Rochdale PCT
Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council
Pennine Care NHS Trust
Pennine Acute Hospitals NHS Trust
Northwest Ambulance Service
In other words they are accountable to themselves.
Who is the representative of the Bolton Council on this Board?
Answer - We don't know but we'll find out.
Mr O'Hanlan suggested that the Leadership of Bolton Council should take a major stand with the PCT leaving them in no doubt of the unsatisfactory state of affairs.
Dr Iddon had earlier explained that the creation of these new 'Mini Hospitals' was with a view to making the extra health services to do with Physiotherapy, Podiatry, Mental Health etc etc available locally - thus taking the pressure off the Royal Bolton Hospital. This is why the increase in size was required.
There is some doubt as to what services are currently provided at Little Lever and what are likely to be provided in the future at the new Centre.
A point was made that the new health centre at Little Lever would cost £7million to build but the problem was that the building would be leased back by Bolton PCT for £1million per year for 25 years. ------ £25,000,000 !!!!!!!!!!
A further point was that in view of the fact that it is unlikely that the health centre would be built before 2015 -if at all - then a quicker, more cost effective and more satisfactory solution would be the extend the current building to the back of the car park (thus approximately doubling it's size as required) and a complete refurbishment to a modern standard. This surely could be done for a couple of million quid.
Other points were made, one in particular being that the PCT had a duty under the Health protection rules for the safety and working conditions for the Doctors and Staff and a Risk Assessment and a mandatory survey of working conditions ought to be in existence - but it isn't
I hope this is a fair summary of what went on.
Although mention was made of patients from outside the area being treated at the centre, one thing that wasn't discussed was the abysmal situation with appointments.
Dr Iddon did say that the worst health situation in the Borough was in Farnworth ( which is where most of the outside patients are coming from)
Anyway - nil desperandum
Latest news - Dr Iddon, who admitted he hadn't been in the health centre for quite some time is hopefully making a Papal Visit there tomorrow morning.
Bless all our deliberations - Paul
Tuesday, 6 October 2009
Little Lever Health Centre - Again
Well the famous public meeting is to take place tomorrow night. Bit of a hiccup though.
Apparently one concerned and campaigning member of the public in a telephone conversation with an officer of the Primary Care Trust said something along the lines of "What so we have to do to get this new Health Centre - Put a gun to your head ????"
Unbelievably the next thing that happened was that Plod turned up and threw him in the cells - prompting an article in the Bolton News. It informs us that the Primary Care Trust will not now be represented at the meeting because of fears for their safety.
You couldn't make it up. It goes to show the mentality of the people who work for these Quangos that they could take something like that as any kind of a threat as opposed to an expression of frustration at the stonewalling that is going on with this matter.
Plod has even offered to afford the poor creature 'protection' at the meeting, which she has turned down.
Personally I think it's just an excuse for them to avoid the kind of verbal mauling that they deserve and would quite likely get tomorrow.
At this point I must emphasise that in spite of the rumours sweeping around the Village, it wasn't me.
Suitably fired up I've sent the following letter to the Bolton News which I hope will be published tomorrow.
Dear Sir,
So officers from NHS Bolton are refusing to attend next weeks public meeting about the Little Lever Health Centre because of their fears for their own safety.
Perhaps therefore they would consider informing the public through your newspaper from the safety of their comfy offices. They could do this by answering the following questions.
Is the proposed Health Centre being built under a Private Finance Initiative.?
Is therefore the problem not with the capital cost but with the repayments.?
Why is it proposed to provide a building when there is no agreement with any doctor that they will occupy it (Area Forum 30th March 2009) nor any means of compelling them to do so.?
How much greater will the 'rents' be for the doctors in the new building than in the old?
Why are the views, wishes and requirements of the doctors not documented in the public domain.?
Has consideration been given to extending the existing building to the rear of the car park thus nearly doubling its size?
How many patients from outside Little Lever and from more health deprived areas are registered at the Centre?
Is it in the financial interest of the doctors to have a larger number of patients on their books thus reducing the service to each one in terms of quick appointments?
If they could answer these questions it would save their time and ours at the next Area Forum, two of which have already been clogged up this year with them telling us nothing that was useful or re-assuring.
....................................................................................
Since writing this letter on 2nd October I've been digging in the archives of the PCT and have come up with the following dated June 2008
.....................................................................................
A Strategic Service Development Plan
Developing Health Services and Buildings in Bolton
(Extracts from the above)
This section of the plan outlines some of the mechanisms and approaches we will use to deliver the plan.
It includes explanations of:
1. The Bolton Rochdale and Heywood and Middleton Local Improvement Finance Trust (BRAHM LIFT),
2. The affordability of our plan,
3. How we will monitor implementation.
............................................................................................................................................
1. The Bolton, Rochdale and Heywood and Middleton Local Improvement Finance Trust
The NHS Local Improvement Finance Trust (LIFT) is a procurement mechanism for development of community health premises. It is a means by which PCTs can enter into a public private partnership that brings advantages of:
Access to capital funding for buildings,
Access to expert experience and skills in property development through the private sector partner,
A long-term public private partnership.
This allows for the development of mature relationships and shared understanding to develop and implement property solutions that enable delivery of strategic aims.
......................................................................................................................................
In May 2007 the Bolton, Rochdale and Heywood and Middleton (BRAHM) LIFT company was established. The Eric Wright Group was selected as the private sector partner (in accordance with NHS LIFT procurement guidelines). The Eric Wright Group has a strong track record with other NHS organisations in the North West.
The BRAHM LIFT Company will design, build and manage the new centres identified in section 4.4 of this plan. Capital funding for the new centres will be provided by the BRAHM LIFT company. Bolton PCT will lease the premises from BRAHM LIFT Company over a 25 year term and will be responsible for the revenue costs of these new centres.
......................................................................................................................................
Membership of the BRAHM LIFT Company and
shareholding is shown below:
% Shareholder shareholding
Eric Wright Group ..................................60 %
Partnerships for Health* .........................20 %
Bolton PCT ............................................10 %
Heywood Middleton and Rochdale PCT 10 %
.........................................................................................................................................
The BRAHM LIFT Company is held to account by the BRAHM LIFT Strategic Partnering Board. This Board comprises membership of:
The Eric Wright Group
Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council
Bolton PCT
Bolton Hospitals NHS Trust
Bolton, Salford and Trafford Mental Health Trust
Heywood Middleton and Rochdale PCT
Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council
Pennine Care NHS Trust
Pennine Acute Hospitals NHS Trust
Northwest Ambulance Service
The Strategic Partnering Board is responsible for identifying the building developments to be commissioned from the LIFT Company and the timeframe for delivery. The Strategic Service Development Plan provides the framework for this.
..........................................................................................................................................
2. Affordability
Bolton PCT has seen a significant increase in its funding since April 2003, in line with the increase in investment in the NHS as a whole. Our income in 2007/08 is £390 million. This increase in resources together with the BRAHM LIFT Company, allows the PCT to invest in our estate infrastructure.
Work has been undertaken to review the money needed to support the development of the PCT's Estate and initial calculations on the assumptions confirm that the Estates Strategy review recommendations described in section 4.4 of this plan are deliverable.
The PCT needs to ensure that an investment in building is consistent with meeting the other priorities for health in Bolton. A five year financial plan demonstrates that we can afford the estimated increase in costs driven by the Estates Strategy after taking account of income changes, and service developments (including those in the Manifesto) and after cost pressures.
.....................................................................................
3. Monitoring Arrangements
Better Health for Bolton - A Manifesto for Improving Health Services includes 71 quantified promises of the developments and improvements in health services which we will implement by 2009.
These promises have been translated into individual service plans, each with detailed milestones and costs, and each with an assessment of the space required to accommodate them.
The development of the PCT estate will enable delivery of the Manifesto. It is also one of the promises being monitored. Progress on implementing the Manifesto developments is regularly reported at Board meetings held in public.
.....................................................................................
Building Plans and schedule for the remaining new Health Centres
Farnworth:-
Completion year was to be 2011
Increase in size from existing 1,200 sq metres to 2,500 sq metres
Great Lever:-
Completion year was to be 2011
Increase in size from existing 1,323 sq metres to 2,500 sq metres
Avondale:-
Completion year was to be 2011
Increase in size from existing 1,047 sq metres to 2,500 sq metres
Horwich:-
Completion year was to be 2012
Increase in size from existing 419 sq metres to 1,000 sq metres
Westhoughton:-
Completion year was to be 2012
Increase in size from existing 303 sq metres to 1,000 sq metres
Little Lever:-
Completion year was to be 2012
Increase in size from existing 700 sq metres to 1,500 sq metres
.................................................................................
Now Westhoughton Councillors are kicking off about the delay in their new Health centre as per this article in the Bolton News which also provides some further info.
Westhoughton health centre delay angers town's councillors
Plans to delay the building of a new health centre in Westhoughton have angered the town’s councillors.
NHS Bolton has admitted plans for six super surgeries have been put back by six years.
And it was revealed Westhoughton was at the bottom of its priority list, behind Avondale, Farnworth, Great Lever, Little Lever and Horwich.
The town’s current health centre is in a Victorian terrace property in Market Street. There are also three GP surgeries in the town, two of which are very small practices.
Now councillors in Westhoughton claim it is another example of the town being overlooked by Bolton....................................................
Westhoughton, Horwich and Little Lever were due to have new health centres built in 2011/12, after Avondale, Farnworth and Great Lever in 2010/11.
NHS Bolton said in May it was unlikely to keep to the schedule because, although the centres were being built by a third party at an average cost of £7 million, the NHS Bolton must pay £1 million a year per centre in rent.
A spokesman for NHS Bolton said: “NHS Bolton remains committed to replacing Westhoughton Health Centre but, as previously reported due to financial constraints, the timetable is being reviewed.
“All the six areas which had previously been identified for new health centres went through a prioritisation exercise.
“Out of a possible score of 99, Westhoughton scored 27.5, which is sixth on the list. The new Westhoughton Health Centre was originally due to open in 2012. The new timetable reflecting financial planning will be approved at the October board.”
.....................................................................................
This confirms that since the middle of this year the order of build has been reviewed and prioritised on the basis of Health Deprivation of the individual areas. It would appear that Little Lever is now fourth on the list.
It also reveals that the average cost of build would be £7m and each centre would be leased back for 25 years at a cost to the PCT of £1m per year
So- putting it crudely - Eric Wright would build Little Lever Health Centre for £7m and over £25 yrs would receive £25m for his efforts. Not a bad little earner.
.....................................................................................
Run out of time before the 'Meeting'
Next Blog More about 'Health Deprivation' and what happened at the meeting
Paul
Apparently one concerned and campaigning member of the public in a telephone conversation with an officer of the Primary Care Trust said something along the lines of "What so we have to do to get this new Health Centre - Put a gun to your head ????"
Unbelievably the next thing that happened was that Plod turned up and threw him in the cells - prompting an article in the Bolton News. It informs us that the Primary Care Trust will not now be represented at the meeting because of fears for their safety.
You couldn't make it up. It goes to show the mentality of the people who work for these Quangos that they could take something like that as any kind of a threat as opposed to an expression of frustration at the stonewalling that is going on with this matter.
Plod has even offered to afford the poor creature 'protection' at the meeting, which she has turned down.
Personally I think it's just an excuse for them to avoid the kind of verbal mauling that they deserve and would quite likely get tomorrow.
At this point I must emphasise that in spite of the rumours sweeping around the Village, it wasn't me.
Suitably fired up I've sent the following letter to the Bolton News which I hope will be published tomorrow.
Dear Sir,
So officers from NHS Bolton are refusing to attend next weeks public meeting about the Little Lever Health Centre because of their fears for their own safety.
Perhaps therefore they would consider informing the public through your newspaper from the safety of their comfy offices. They could do this by answering the following questions.
Is the proposed Health Centre being built under a Private Finance Initiative.?
Is therefore the problem not with the capital cost but with the repayments.?
Why is it proposed to provide a building when there is no agreement with any doctor that they will occupy it (Area Forum 30th March 2009) nor any means of compelling them to do so.?
How much greater will the 'rents' be for the doctors in the new building than in the old?
Why are the views, wishes and requirements of the doctors not documented in the public domain.?
Has consideration been given to extending the existing building to the rear of the car park thus nearly doubling its size?
How many patients from outside Little Lever and from more health deprived areas are registered at the Centre?
Is it in the financial interest of the doctors to have a larger number of patients on their books thus reducing the service to each one in terms of quick appointments?
If they could answer these questions it would save their time and ours at the next Area Forum, two of which have already been clogged up this year with them telling us nothing that was useful or re-assuring.
....................................................................................
Since writing this letter on 2nd October I've been digging in the archives of the PCT and have come up with the following dated June 2008
.....................................................................................
A Strategic Service Development Plan
Developing Health Services and Buildings in Bolton
(Extracts from the above)
This section of the plan outlines some of the mechanisms and approaches we will use to deliver the plan.
It includes explanations of:
1. The Bolton Rochdale and Heywood and Middleton Local Improvement Finance Trust (BRAHM LIFT),
2. The affordability of our plan,
3. How we will monitor implementation.
............................................................................................................................................
1. The Bolton, Rochdale and Heywood and Middleton Local Improvement Finance Trust
The NHS Local Improvement Finance Trust (LIFT) is a procurement mechanism for development of community health premises. It is a means by which PCTs can enter into a public private partnership that brings advantages of:
Access to capital funding for buildings,
Access to expert experience and skills in property development through the private sector partner,
A long-term public private partnership.
This allows for the development of mature relationships and shared understanding to develop and implement property solutions that enable delivery of strategic aims.
......................................................................................................................................
In May 2007 the Bolton, Rochdale and Heywood and Middleton (BRAHM) LIFT company was established. The Eric Wright Group was selected as the private sector partner (in accordance with NHS LIFT procurement guidelines). The Eric Wright Group has a strong track record with other NHS organisations in the North West.
The BRAHM LIFT Company will design, build and manage the new centres identified in section 4.4 of this plan. Capital funding for the new centres will be provided by the BRAHM LIFT company. Bolton PCT will lease the premises from BRAHM LIFT Company over a 25 year term and will be responsible for the revenue costs of these new centres.
......................................................................................................................................
Membership of the BRAHM LIFT Company and
shareholding is shown below:
% Shareholder shareholding
Eric Wright Group ..................................60 %
Partnerships for Health* .........................20 %
Bolton PCT ............................................10 %
Heywood Middleton and Rochdale PCT 10 %
.........................................................................................................................................
The BRAHM LIFT Company is held to account by the BRAHM LIFT Strategic Partnering Board. This Board comprises membership of:
The Eric Wright Group
Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council
Bolton PCT
Bolton Hospitals NHS Trust
Bolton, Salford and Trafford Mental Health Trust
Heywood Middleton and Rochdale PCT
Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council
Pennine Care NHS Trust
Pennine Acute Hospitals NHS Trust
Northwest Ambulance Service
The Strategic Partnering Board is responsible for identifying the building developments to be commissioned from the LIFT Company and the timeframe for delivery. The Strategic Service Development Plan provides the framework for this.
..........................................................................................................................................
2. Affordability
Bolton PCT has seen a significant increase in its funding since April 2003, in line with the increase in investment in the NHS as a whole. Our income in 2007/08 is £390 million. This increase in resources together with the BRAHM LIFT Company, allows the PCT to invest in our estate infrastructure.
Work has been undertaken to review the money needed to support the development of the PCT's Estate and initial calculations on the assumptions confirm that the Estates Strategy review recommendations described in section 4.4 of this plan are deliverable.
The PCT needs to ensure that an investment in building is consistent with meeting the other priorities for health in Bolton. A five year financial plan demonstrates that we can afford the estimated increase in costs driven by the Estates Strategy after taking account of income changes, and service developments (including those in the Manifesto) and after cost pressures.
.....................................................................................
3. Monitoring Arrangements
Better Health for Bolton - A Manifesto for Improving Health Services includes 71 quantified promises of the developments and improvements in health services which we will implement by 2009.
These promises have been translated into individual service plans, each with detailed milestones and costs, and each with an assessment of the space required to accommodate them.
The development of the PCT estate will enable delivery of the Manifesto. It is also one of the promises being monitored. Progress on implementing the Manifesto developments is regularly reported at Board meetings held in public.
.....................................................................................
Building Plans and schedule for the remaining new Health Centres
Farnworth:-
Completion year was to be 2011
Increase in size from existing 1,200 sq metres to 2,500 sq metres
Great Lever:-
Completion year was to be 2011
Increase in size from existing 1,323 sq metres to 2,500 sq metres
Avondale:-
Completion year was to be 2011
Increase in size from existing 1,047 sq metres to 2,500 sq metres
Horwich:-
Completion year was to be 2012
Increase in size from existing 419 sq metres to 1,000 sq metres
Westhoughton:-
Completion year was to be 2012
Increase in size from existing 303 sq metres to 1,000 sq metres
Little Lever:-
Completion year was to be 2012
Increase in size from existing 700 sq metres to 1,500 sq metres
.................................................................................
Now Westhoughton Councillors are kicking off about the delay in their new Health centre as per this article in the Bolton News which also provides some further info.
Westhoughton health centre delay angers town's councillors
Plans to delay the building of a new health centre in Westhoughton have angered the town’s councillors.
NHS Bolton has admitted plans for six super surgeries have been put back by six years.
And it was revealed Westhoughton was at the bottom of its priority list, behind Avondale, Farnworth, Great Lever, Little Lever and Horwich.
The town’s current health centre is in a Victorian terrace property in Market Street. There are also three GP surgeries in the town, two of which are very small practices.
Now councillors in Westhoughton claim it is another example of the town being overlooked by Bolton....................................................
Westhoughton, Horwich and Little Lever were due to have new health centres built in 2011/12, after Avondale, Farnworth and Great Lever in 2010/11.
NHS Bolton said in May it was unlikely to keep to the schedule because, although the centres were being built by a third party at an average cost of £7 million, the NHS Bolton must pay £1 million a year per centre in rent.
A spokesman for NHS Bolton said: “NHS Bolton remains committed to replacing Westhoughton Health Centre but, as previously reported due to financial constraints, the timetable is being reviewed.
“All the six areas which had previously been identified for new health centres went through a prioritisation exercise.
“Out of a possible score of 99, Westhoughton scored 27.5, which is sixth on the list. The new Westhoughton Health Centre was originally due to open in 2012. The new timetable reflecting financial planning will be approved at the October board.”
.....................................................................................
This confirms that since the middle of this year the order of build has been reviewed and prioritised on the basis of Health Deprivation of the individual areas. It would appear that Little Lever is now fourth on the list.
It also reveals that the average cost of build would be £7m and each centre would be leased back for 25 years at a cost to the PCT of £1m per year
So- putting it crudely - Eric Wright would build Little Lever Health Centre for £7m and over £25 yrs would receive £25m for his efforts. Not a bad little earner.
.....................................................................................
Run out of time before the 'Meeting'
Next Blog More about 'Health Deprivation' and what happened at the meeting
Paul
Tuesday, 22 September 2009
Little Lever Health Centre
Where do we start?
I suppose the bottom line is Doctor & Patient - One to One. You go along and say you're ill. If you're lucky, he figures out what's wrong with you and gives you some treatment.
The point I'm getting at is that this could take place in the middle of a field. All the things that are built on top of this simple truth are bolt-on bells and whistles, primarily for the Doctors convenience but hopefully also for the patients.
From what I can gather there are two centres of GP activity in Little Lever, one of course is the 'Health Centre' run under the auspices of the NHS and the other is Springview which is a privately owned building with a two doctor practice who I assume get paid by the NHS.
The Health Centre seems to contain three GP practices involving to a greater or lesser degree some 11 doctors. (On various internet sites there are 11 doctors names logged against the Health Centre - How accurate this is I don't know.
The building I guess dates from the 60's or early 70's, brick built with a flat felted roof and a front facia which seems to be of painted wood. Anecdotally has become dilapidated with leaking roof and certainly the front facia has not been maintained for years.
Have a look at some piccys. The first one tells you all you need to know.
I suspect that apart from this, the real problem with the physicality of the building is that it simply isn't large enough to accomodate all the ancillary medical procedures which GPs now get involved in (and get paid extra for).
So along come the Bolton Primary Care Trust ( Now NHS Bolton ) with the proposition to build a series of state of the art buildings in several areas of Bolton. And that's it. They are providing the building ( and maybe equipping it).
From remarks made by representatives of the PCT at the Area Forum there is no agreement yet made with any of the doctors that they will in fact move into the building if and when it finally arrives.
The question is if it were to be built and occupied tomorrow, would the patient experience be improved?
Found this little gem on the NHS Complaints site.
Posted by VERY WORRIED PATIENT two weeks ago
"We have been patients at Little Lever health centre for several years and have always been pleased with the support of the staff and the care of the doctors and nurses.
However, I think in the past few months there seem to be many problems concerned with the reception people.
One morning I waited 10 minutes with their phone ringing to gain an appointment with a nurse. No one answered, I rang back and it then was engaged, I rang repeatedly but I think the phone seemed to be switched to engaged as they were unobtainable. I tried for two hours to get through. I find this is not an isolated incident, it happens frequently.
Although they state you can order repeat medication via the internet, I find this is not the case. I put items on the internet, when no one gets back to you (we have left as long as two weeks and been completely out of medication,) you call in and inform them. They then check the internet and print the items, you have to wait until a doctor is available to sign. I believe this is worse than just calling in, dropping your prescription and going back the next day.
This morning as stated I received a letter to request I have my check up for hypertension, I ended up having to walk to the centre to speak to the reception. I asked also if I was supposed to have nothing to eat or drink prior to the test, she did not know and had no one to ask. I mentioned that there was a notice about suggestions for the centre and could I have a form. She was unaware of any forms and gave me a blank piece of A4 paper!
What is concerning is that if there is an emergency, there may be no one will answer the phone.
I wish someone would look into this and help rectify what is going wrong"
To which the reply last week was :-
"Hi - Sorry to hear you've been worried. As the Primary Care Trust for the Bolton Area we've alerted all three of the GP practices based at Little Lever Health Centre to your posting as we're not sure which one you are registered with
It's important that you take up these issues with the practice concerned - your feedback will help them improve their service. If the Practice Manager is unable to resolve matters to your satisfaction please don't hesitate to contact NHS Bolton and we'll be happy to look into it.............................I hope your discussions with the practice are fruitful
Contributed by Communications Manager, NHS Bolton"
Practice Managers? - Communication Managers? - Just pick up the bloody phone!!!
Remarks made by the public at various Area Forums left no one there in any doubt that the biggest bone of contention is the appointments system. Typically you can't get an appointment till next week -
" But I'm not ill next week I'm ill now"
" Well, can I make an appointment for next week?"
" No - you can only make an appointment 48 hrs in advance"
Say no more !!!
This is followed by the allegation that patients from Moses Gate & Farnworth were being treated at the Health Centre thus making getting an appointment more difficult.
Ask yourself - If they cannot or unwilling to sort this out in the existing building, would it be any different in the new building?
This now brings me on to the likelyhood of the new building ever being built.
Make no mistake about it, the glory days of pumping squillions into the NHS have gone. From next year, whoever is in government, there will be cuts and particularly cuts in Capital Projects. If the money for Little Lever Centre is not already in it's own seperate bank account, then the odds are there will be no money.
In an article in the Bolton News of last week, NHS Bolton admitted it couldn't balance it's books at the present moment and were looking at cuts in budgets and rescheduling projects such as the District Health Centre Building Programme.
This is a copy of a letter I have written in response which has yet to be published.
"Dear Sir
So, now it is out in the open. The local Primary Care Trust - NHS Bolton - has admitted that they are intending to save £4m by rescheduling the building of the planned six District Health Centres. As far as I am aware these were all to be completed by 2011.
At an Area Forum Meeting for Little Lever and Darcy Lever on 14th July the PCT's Chief Executive gave a presentation which left many of us in no doubt that since, in health terms, Little Lever was not considered to be deprived, then the Little Lever Health Centre was likely to be the last of the six to be built. Although he has promised to report back at the end of Autumn, it is likely that if we see this new Health Centre this side of 2015 then we'll be lucky.
The problem is that the existing Health Centre is falling down. Buckets are catching the rain leaking through the roof. The service to patients is anecdotally pathetic. The place is at least twenty years beyond its planned lifespan.
Surely, after the billions of extra cash that the Government has ploughed into the NHS on our behalf, Little Lever Residents should be able to expect a decent building within which to consult with our doctors. Not some great palace full of wizard technology - just a decent building.
The building money should have been ring-fenced from the cost of sophisticated procedures elsewhere.
Little Lever should stop always being seen as the well off Auntie when it is in fact becoming impoverished and we should receive equal, if not greater, priority with other Districts on the basis of the dilapidation of the existing building.
Councillor Hornby has convened a Public Meeting on the subject which will take place
on Tuesday 6th October at 7pm at Mytham Road Primary School.
This subject has raised the blood pressure of the residents of Little Lever which must be a matter of great concern for the PCT."
Enough for now - apart from - Have you heard about the proposal to move the Library into the new Health Centre when it is built - "because it's not big enough". Who says so - " The Librarians" - No they don't, I've asked them. Apparently there's £1 million available in some fund or other that can be squandered by the Council on this.
Paul
I suppose the bottom line is Doctor & Patient - One to One. You go along and say you're ill. If you're lucky, he figures out what's wrong with you and gives you some treatment.
The point I'm getting at is that this could take place in the middle of a field. All the things that are built on top of this simple truth are bolt-on bells and whistles, primarily for the Doctors convenience but hopefully also for the patients.
From what I can gather there are two centres of GP activity in Little Lever, one of course is the 'Health Centre' run under the auspices of the NHS and the other is Springview which is a privately owned building with a two doctor practice who I assume get paid by the NHS.
The Health Centre seems to contain three GP practices involving to a greater or lesser degree some 11 doctors. (On various internet sites there are 11 doctors names logged against the Health Centre - How accurate this is I don't know.
The building I guess dates from the 60's or early 70's, brick built with a flat felted roof and a front facia which seems to be of painted wood. Anecdotally has become dilapidated with leaking roof and certainly the front facia has not been maintained for years.
Have a look at some piccys. The first one tells you all you need to know.
I suspect that apart from this, the real problem with the physicality of the building is that it simply isn't large enough to accomodate all the ancillary medical procedures which GPs now get involved in (and get paid extra for).
So along come the Bolton Primary Care Trust ( Now NHS Bolton ) with the proposition to build a series of state of the art buildings in several areas of Bolton. And that's it. They are providing the building ( and maybe equipping it).
From remarks made by representatives of the PCT at the Area Forum there is no agreement yet made with any of the doctors that they will in fact move into the building if and when it finally arrives.
The question is if it were to be built and occupied tomorrow, would the patient experience be improved?
Found this little gem on the NHS Complaints site.
Posted by VERY WORRIED PATIENT two weeks ago
"We have been patients at Little Lever health centre for several years and have always been pleased with the support of the staff and the care of the doctors and nurses.
However, I think in the past few months there seem to be many problems concerned with the reception people.
One morning I waited 10 minutes with their phone ringing to gain an appointment with a nurse. No one answered, I rang back and it then was engaged, I rang repeatedly but I think the phone seemed to be switched to engaged as they were unobtainable. I tried for two hours to get through. I find this is not an isolated incident, it happens frequently.
Although they state you can order repeat medication via the internet, I find this is not the case. I put items on the internet, when no one gets back to you (we have left as long as two weeks and been completely out of medication,) you call in and inform them. They then check the internet and print the items, you have to wait until a doctor is available to sign. I believe this is worse than just calling in, dropping your prescription and going back the next day.
This morning as stated I received a letter to request I have my check up for hypertension, I ended up having to walk to the centre to speak to the reception. I asked also if I was supposed to have nothing to eat or drink prior to the test, she did not know and had no one to ask. I mentioned that there was a notice about suggestions for the centre and could I have a form. She was unaware of any forms and gave me a blank piece of A4 paper!
What is concerning is that if there is an emergency, there may be no one will answer the phone.
I wish someone would look into this and help rectify what is going wrong"
To which the reply last week was :-
"Hi - Sorry to hear you've been worried. As the Primary Care Trust for the Bolton Area we've alerted all three of the GP practices based at Little Lever Health Centre to your posting as we're not sure which one you are registered with
It's important that you take up these issues with the practice concerned - your feedback will help them improve their service. If the Practice Manager is unable to resolve matters to your satisfaction please don't hesitate to contact NHS Bolton and we'll be happy to look into it.............................I hope your discussions with the practice are fruitful
Contributed by Communications Manager, NHS Bolton"
Practice Managers? - Communication Managers? - Just pick up the bloody phone!!!
Remarks made by the public at various Area Forums left no one there in any doubt that the biggest bone of contention is the appointments system. Typically you can't get an appointment till next week -
" But I'm not ill next week I'm ill now"
" Well, can I make an appointment for next week?"
" No - you can only make an appointment 48 hrs in advance"
Say no more !!!
This is followed by the allegation that patients from Moses Gate & Farnworth were being treated at the Health Centre thus making getting an appointment more difficult.
Ask yourself - If they cannot or unwilling to sort this out in the existing building, would it be any different in the new building?
This now brings me on to the likelyhood of the new building ever being built.
Make no mistake about it, the glory days of pumping squillions into the NHS have gone. From next year, whoever is in government, there will be cuts and particularly cuts in Capital Projects. If the money for Little Lever Centre is not already in it's own seperate bank account, then the odds are there will be no money.
In an article in the Bolton News of last week, NHS Bolton admitted it couldn't balance it's books at the present moment and were looking at cuts in budgets and rescheduling projects such as the District Health Centre Building Programme.
This is a copy of a letter I have written in response which has yet to be published.
"Dear Sir
So, now it is out in the open. The local Primary Care Trust - NHS Bolton - has admitted that they are intending to save £4m by rescheduling the building of the planned six District Health Centres. As far as I am aware these were all to be completed by 2011.
At an Area Forum Meeting for Little Lever and Darcy Lever on 14th July the PCT's Chief Executive gave a presentation which left many of us in no doubt that since, in health terms, Little Lever was not considered to be deprived, then the Little Lever Health Centre was likely to be the last of the six to be built. Although he has promised to report back at the end of Autumn, it is likely that if we see this new Health Centre this side of 2015 then we'll be lucky.
The problem is that the existing Health Centre is falling down. Buckets are catching the rain leaking through the roof. The service to patients is anecdotally pathetic. The place is at least twenty years beyond its planned lifespan.
Surely, after the billions of extra cash that the Government has ploughed into the NHS on our behalf, Little Lever Residents should be able to expect a decent building within which to consult with our doctors. Not some great palace full of wizard technology - just a decent building.
The building money should have been ring-fenced from the cost of sophisticated procedures elsewhere.
Little Lever should stop always being seen as the well off Auntie when it is in fact becoming impoverished and we should receive equal, if not greater, priority with other Districts on the basis of the dilapidation of the existing building.
Councillor Hornby has convened a Public Meeting on the subject which will take place
on Tuesday 6th October at 7pm at Mytham Road Primary School.
This subject has raised the blood pressure of the residents of Little Lever which must be a matter of great concern for the PCT."
Enough for now - apart from - Have you heard about the proposal to move the Library into the new Health Centre when it is built - "because it's not big enough". Who says so - " The Librarians" - No they don't, I've asked them. Apparently there's £1 million available in some fund or other that can be squandered by the Council on this.
Paul
Saturday, 19 September 2009
JUST TO BRING YOU UP TO DATE ON THE £50K
Not blogged for ages but that doesn't mean that I've been inactive on matters of the Village Centre.
Just to bring you up to date, the biggest specific problem recently has been the prospect under the current proposals that a large proportion of the £50k will be spent on Block Paving the Co-op side of Market St from the Village Chippy to the Library.
It isn't that this project would have no merit, if there were squillions of money to spend, but I, for one, maintain that if it were to go ahead soaking up 63% of this limited amount of money, then the other visible signs of dilapidation around the centre would never get fixed.
Anyway, I've measured up the pavement and it comes to 350 square metres. I've got professional quotes from several companies and the most I can get it to is £22,750. - £65 per square metre. This is against £31,500 pounds costed in the proposals. I'm not really suprised because quotes for other aspects of work such as signage seem to my mind to be equally inflated. Why do Councils allow contractors to get away with inflated quotes or, if it's done in house, why are the Works Departments so un-competative?
Following on from this, I have contacted the Executive Member for Development & Regeneration (who signed off the spending of the £50k against these proposals) about apparent differences of opinion on the proposals and also the Public Consultation (or lack of it).
He informs me that he has referred the whole thing back to the Director of Development & Regeneration and I'm led to believe that the Officers and Councillors will meet shortly to review the proposals.
It is perhaps wise, therefore to wait for the outcome of this.
Should there be no change then I am minded to ask that the whole thing be discussed in public as a substantial part of the next Area Forum Meeting in November.
If, in the event, that request is either refused or cannot be accommodated, then a series of written questions from several members of the public being submitted to the Forum should liven things up.
Finally, of course there is such a thing as the Council's Scrutiny Committee who might be interested to ask why this large amount of money is being used to rip up a pavement that's only been down five years or so.
There is another meeting of the 'Love Little Lever' Forum on Tuesday 21st Sept at 6.00pm at Hardy Hall.
I think that this meeting should steer away from discussing the £50k whilst the Council are getting there ducks in a row.
I have distributed letters to all the businesses in the Village Centre not currently involved in the 'Love Little Lever' Group inviting them to this meeting with a view to expanding our base of views, opinions & ideas.
I, personally, would be keen to see the 'Love Little Lever' group (aka the Little Lever Business & Residents Forum) being officially recognised by the Council as per the 2006 Little Lever Action Plan.
I also think that a decision should be taken to proceed with repainting the cream walls without further ado.
I have sought the opinion of professional painters and decorators about the possibility of removing the paint from the walls (as has been alternatively suggested). Their collective opinion is that the nature of the brick precludes the blanket strip method and the only way we could get the paint off would be to sandblast it which would be horrendously expensive and damage the lack of porosity of the brick.
Let's just repaint the bloody things to make them look clean.
Litter is becoming an issue again, this week not on the square but on the Co-op side, the Precinct Car Parks and particularly the whole length of Fletcher St.
I don't think we are left with any other option than to take up the offer of Street Litter Control Notices and embarass the Police and CPSO's into taking the matter seriously.
Sorry no piccys on this Blog
Next Blog - a bit of light relief from the Village Centre - THE HEALTH CENTRE !!!
Just to bring you up to date, the biggest specific problem recently has been the prospect under the current proposals that a large proportion of the £50k will be spent on Block Paving the Co-op side of Market St from the Village Chippy to the Library.
It isn't that this project would have no merit, if there were squillions of money to spend, but I, for one, maintain that if it were to go ahead soaking up 63% of this limited amount of money, then the other visible signs of dilapidation around the centre would never get fixed.
Anyway, I've measured up the pavement and it comes to 350 square metres. I've got professional quotes from several companies and the most I can get it to is £22,750. - £65 per square metre. This is against £31,500 pounds costed in the proposals. I'm not really suprised because quotes for other aspects of work such as signage seem to my mind to be equally inflated. Why do Councils allow contractors to get away with inflated quotes or, if it's done in house, why are the Works Departments so un-competative?
Following on from this, I have contacted the Executive Member for Development & Regeneration (who signed off the spending of the £50k against these proposals) about apparent differences of opinion on the proposals and also the Public Consultation (or lack of it).
He informs me that he has referred the whole thing back to the Director of Development & Regeneration and I'm led to believe that the Officers and Councillors will meet shortly to review the proposals.
It is perhaps wise, therefore to wait for the outcome of this.
Should there be no change then I am minded to ask that the whole thing be discussed in public as a substantial part of the next Area Forum Meeting in November.
If, in the event, that request is either refused or cannot be accommodated, then a series of written questions from several members of the public being submitted to the Forum should liven things up.
Finally, of course there is such a thing as the Council's Scrutiny Committee who might be interested to ask why this large amount of money is being used to rip up a pavement that's only been down five years or so.
There is another meeting of the 'Love Little Lever' Forum on Tuesday 21st Sept at 6.00pm at Hardy Hall.
I think that this meeting should steer away from discussing the £50k whilst the Council are getting there ducks in a row.
I have distributed letters to all the businesses in the Village Centre not currently involved in the 'Love Little Lever' Group inviting them to this meeting with a view to expanding our base of views, opinions & ideas.
I, personally, would be keen to see the 'Love Little Lever' group (aka the Little Lever Business & Residents Forum) being officially recognised by the Council as per the 2006 Little Lever Action Plan.
I also think that a decision should be taken to proceed with repainting the cream walls without further ado.
I have sought the opinion of professional painters and decorators about the possibility of removing the paint from the walls (as has been alternatively suggested). Their collective opinion is that the nature of the brick precludes the blanket strip method and the only way we could get the paint off would be to sandblast it which would be horrendously expensive and damage the lack of porosity of the brick.
Let's just repaint the bloody things to make them look clean.
Litter is becoming an issue again, this week not on the square but on the Co-op side, the Precinct Car Parks and particularly the whole length of Fletcher St.
I don't think we are left with any other option than to take up the offer of Street Litter Control Notices and embarass the Police and CPSO's into taking the matter seriously.
Sorry no piccys on this Blog
Next Blog - a bit of light relief from the Village Centre - THE HEALTH CENTRE !!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
