To receive any questions, statements or petitions from the public, notice of which has been given in accordance with Procedure Rule 14.

The following statement and public questions were received from Mr David Sandbach;

Statement: I am concerned that the debate about funding health services in Shropshire is starting to demonise people who live in Wales. My concern stems from the report on the front page of the Shropshire Star on the 18^th of March 2015 and the following piece on page six.

Response: The Chair explained that she had commented in the local newspaper (the Shropshire Star) because of the negative impact being made on Shropshire’s health budget as far as sexual health services were concerned. She confirmed that in no way did she wish to demonise the people of Powys.

It was noted that both the CCG and Health and Wellbeing Board had made representations to the Welsh Affairs Committee re. cross border issues.

The Director of Public Health also made clear that there were no objections to people coming across the county border to access Shropshire’s services, but unfortunately in respect of Powys, there was no way of re-charging for those services as happened with Cheshire and Staffordshire. This gave rise to an element of concern with regard to the cost to date of £90,000 to the Shropshire health economy. 

It was noted that the CCG had similar pressures for urgent care too, amounting to £700,000 across the two CCG’s (Shropshire and Telford).

As a supplementary question, Mr Sandbach asked to see the documentary evidence of this, which Dr Julie Davies offered to supply to Mr Sandbach after the meeting and go through the information with him if required. 

Questions:

Q1      ‘The Health Gateway review recommendations:

Level - Do Now – To increase the likelihood of a successful outcome it is of the greatest importance that the programme/project should take action immediately.

The Core Group should ensure that a whole system affordability position is agreed to inform the Programme and the development of business cases – this is a do now task in the report.

Other whole system reconfiguration programmes have found it beneficial to reach joint agreement on an affordability envelope or baseline, sometimes referred to as a “single version of the truth”. This provides a firm basis for assessing the affordability of options, and ensures the credibility of any business cases submitted to external bodies for approval. The Future Fit Programme needs to progress this urgently if it is to proceed with its current timetable.

Where is the Core Group up to?’

Response: The CCG confirmed that this was currently being reviewed by the Programme Board and that pleasingly the Core Group was working on a joint agreement on affordability. It was anticipated that this work should be complete by the end of June 2015.

Q2.     ‘Are there any plans for opening additional intermediate care beds as a means of managing winter pressures in 2015?’

Response: the CCG confirmed that it was their ambition to reduce bed based care and the reliance on intermediate bed care.

As a supplementary question Mr Sandbach asked if there were plans to open additional care beds on a temporary basis and were SATH looking at opening up the old maternity unit for this use?

Response: It was confirmed that this option was currently being explored, but it was stressed that this was only at the exploratory stage.

Q3.     ‘When will citizens see the benefit of a 20% reduction in emergency admissions from nursing homes and how many admissions will this amount to in a year?’

Response: The Care Home Advance Scheme (prototype) data was due in next month and this will be reported on when received.