Meeting: Health Scrutiny Sub-Committee (County Hall, Durham - Committee Room 1a - 16/03/2006 01:00:00 PM)
Item: A0 Minutes
Item No 1
DURHAM COUNTY COUNCIL
At a Meeting of the
Health Scrutiny Sub-Committee held at the County Hall, Durham on
Thursday 16 March 2006 at
1.00 p.m. COUNCILLOR J PRIESTLEY in the Chair.
Durham County Council Councillors Carr, Chaplow, Hunter, Porter and Simmons
Chester le Street District Council Councillor Armstrong
Derwentside District Council Councillor Agnew
Durham City Council Councillor Pitts
Easington District Council Councillor Campbell
Sedgefield Borough Council Councillor Crosby
Teesdale District Council Councillor Stansfield
Wear Valley District Council Councillors Harker and Lee
Co-opted Members Councillor M Iveson and H McCaughey
Other Members Councillor S Iveson
Apologies for absence were received from Councillors J Armstrong, Gray and Hamilton.
A1 Declarations of Interest There were no declarations of interest.
A2 Consultation: Proposals for Primary Care Trusts, New Strategic Health Authority and New Ambulance Trust The Sub Committee considered reports of the Northumberland, Tyne and Wear Strategic Health Authority and the Head of Overview and Scrutiny about the consultation exercise proposing changes to the administrative structure of the National Health Service in the North East (for copies see file of Minutes).
Rosemary Granger of the Northumberland, Tyne and Wear Strategic Health Authority outlined the main themes and key messages that have arisen during the consultation process and how the public viewed the proposed changes.
During the discussion of the proposals Members of the Sub Committee expressed concern about the following areas:
- The PCT’s are felt to be working well with District Councils and other local organisations at the present time and that a larger body might be too remote from the people that it will serve. In addition it is difficult to see how the changes will provide better health services.
- The needs of deprived areas such as Derwentside and Easington should be a priority and that there should be a commitment to protect existing funding arrangements.
- The need to ensure that the savings are realised and that they are re-invested in front line services.
- Assurance is needed that the new body will be committed to the genuine consultation of communities on the new local working arrangements.
Rosemary Granger responded to the concerns by explaining the background to the proposals and the need to make national efficiency savings of £250M. In County Durham the number of PCT’s will be reduced and there will be management and administrative savings. GP budgets in Derwentside and Easington will be protected and it is expected that the strong locality links will continue. In relation to the savings, Rosemary explained that the audit process in place would ensure that the savings are achieved.
Resolved: That the following comments be submitted for consideration as part of the consultation process:-
(a) Local authorities have invested significant time in joining up services with the current Primary Care Trusts. Firm assurances are required to ensure that if the proposed new Primary Care Trust covering County Durham is established this will not affect the progress which has been made in the delivery of local services.
(b) The local delivery of commissioning services should be maintained and developed if one PCT is formed.
(c) One of the stated aims of the proposals is to make significant savings to be redirected into direct patient care. Any savings derived from reorganisation in County Durham should be redirected transparently into front-line services for the population of County Durham.
(d) The particular health needs of those areas of deprivation in County Durham should be a priority in any new structure and there should be a commitment that the additional funding provided for the Easington PCT area should be applied to meet the needs of the Easington population.
(e) There should be an assurance that the quality of front-line services provided by the proposed PCT will be preserved, particularly in the light of the major changes to children’s and adult services in local government which is happening at the same time.
(f) There needs to be an assurance that any commitments from existing PCTs (and the Strategic Health Authority and the Ambulance Trust) will be fulfilled by any successor organisations.
(g) The implications for the public and patient involvement agenda and, in particular, Patient Forums and PALS should be clarified at an early stage and the progress made to date by these bodies should be maintained.
(h) If the reconfiguration proceeds either in relation to Option 1 or 2 for County Durham, there is a desire to ensure that any new PCT is involved in genuine public and patient involvement to develop improved services. Whether it is a correct view or not, there was a perception amongst the health scrutiny sub-committee members that, in principle, decisions may already have been made about the future configuration of PCTs. There is a need to demonstrate that this is not the way in which the NHS wishes to introduce improvements.
(i) There was a desire for health scrutiny to be involved in the future in monitoring how any savings derived from this restructure are, in fact, invested in front line care.
A3 Annual Health Checks for Health Trusts The Sub Committee considered a report of the Head of Overview and Scrutiny on the comments made about the main Health Trusts which provide health services to residents of County Durham as part of the national process known as the ‘Annual Health Check’ (for copy see file of Minutes).
Resolved: That the comments detailed in the report be approved.
Attachments
healthscrutiny160306.pdf