Sutton GPs vote to back downgrading of St Helier Hospital

Members of Sutton's Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG), the GPs in charge of Sutton’s healthcare, voted in favour of letting the Better Services Better Value (BSBV) review go forward to consultation at their board meeting at St Bedes Conference centre, in North Cheam, this afternoon.

BSBV is proposing the closure of St Helier's A&E and maternity departments but has been widely criticised – which was demonstrated by protests outside the meeting.

Seven CCGs in the region of SW London and north Surrey affected by the review have the chance to block it by stopping it from going to consultation.

At the beginning of the meeting Tom Brake the MP for Carshalton and Wallington handed a petition to the chairman of Sutton CCG, Brendan Hudson, with over 35,000 signatures against the closures.

However, despite campaigns from residents and politicians Sutton CCG voted in favour of sending BSBV to consultation – arguing that the consultation will give people in Sutton the chance to have their say on the proposals.

Dr Jonathan Cockbain, a GP representative on the panel, said: “If we move forward throughout consultation there will be robust challenges from our clinicians and local GPs and I will be presenting these challenges.”

He urged people to go and speak to their GPs about BSBV however it was met with unrest from the public with one shouting: “We can’t get an appointment.”

It emerged during the meeting that yesterday all 23 of Sutton’s GP practices voted on whether they thought BSBV should go to consultation with 95 GPs saying yes, 59 saying no and 22 abstentions.

For campaigners the decision today was one of the last chances to stop the review going ahead and has put it one step nearer to implementation – and at a further cost of £6m pounds to the tax payer.

Ten members of the board voted to go to consultation, one abstained and one, a lay member of the board, Sally Brearley, voted against the review voicing serious concerns.

She was concerned whether Sutton CCG had taken sufficient legal advice, and the fact that the BSBV review is dependent on sufficient services being in place in the local community by the time the frontline hospital services close.

She said: “I think you have heard a number of people from the CCG board say that we are not in a place at the moment to say where these services will be and how they will be provided.

“My worry is if we lose A&E and maternity at St Helier we will not have the resources at the right time to reinvest in Sutton.”

Following the meeting Carshalton and Wallington MP Tom Brake said: “This is depressing news for people who rely heavily on A&E and maternity at St Helier hospital.

“The 64,000 dollar question about where does the money come from to fund services in the community wasn’t answered today so there can be no guarantees these services will stop people going to A&E.”

Leader of Sutton Council, Ruth Dombey, urged people to lobby their GPs and said: “I’m hugely disappointed. I think the meeting helped throw light on the fact there’s no clinical evidence to support the proposal.”

Paul Burstow, MP for Sutton and Cheam, said: "I am very disappointed that the Sutton CCG Board has decided to press ahead and consult on these flawed proposals.  

"This decision is not the end of the matter.  Now the public will have their say.  I haven't met anyone in Sutton, Cheam and Worcester Park who thinks closing St Helier or Epsom's A&E and maternity units is the right thing to do."

Paul Scully, the Conservative parliamentary candidate for Sutton and Cheam for 2015, said: “What local residents and staff at St Helier need is certainty about the future of healthcare in the borough now.”

Once they have voted all seven CCGs will send delegates to a group meeting on June 3 and they must be unanimous in their decision to go to consultation.

Campaigners are hoping that Surrey Downs CCG, the group of GPs responsible for Epsom, will oppose any decision to go to consultation at their board meeting on May 17.

Chairman of Sutton CCG, Brendan Hudson, issued a statement following the controversial decision:

"Today the Board of Sutton CCG accepted the proposed Better Services Better Value (BSBV) options to go to public consultation. This decision means that we think the options give us possible ways of making NHS services in Sutton safe and sustainable for the future, and we would like them to be considered by the public. We believe it is very important that local people have the opportunity to be consulted on their views.

“This decision does not mean we will simply accept whatever the BSBV programme proposes. If the public consultation goes ahead, Sutton CCG will be asking the BSBV programme to do further work on the impact of the options, and more detailed work on the proposal to have more out of hospital services in local settings. We recognise that this is an area of concern for many people, which was reinforced by the views expressed by members of the public at today's meeting. This needs to be addressed.

“However, we cannot stick our heads in the sand and ignore the very real issues that exist within our local services. All local hospitals are struggling to meet the quality standards set by clinicians in some service areas, emergency and maternity teams are not able to offer the same services at weekends and evenings as they do during the week and the current hospital structure will become unaffordable in the future if nothing changes. The people of Sutton have a right to consistently high quality services whenever they need them.

“We are doctors working at the heart of the community, so this has been a difficult decision to make in the face of strong local views; views reflected at both the GP vote yesterday and the Board vote today. But it is clear that things need to change and we will continue to work with local people and the BSBV team to make sure we have safe and sustainable NHS services for Sutton."

"We are grateful that so many people attended the meeting today. We are sorry that not everyone could get into the room and we will make sure that future meetings are held in larger venues to accommodate everyone who wishes to attend."