Councillor Savory to Move
This Council requests that the Cabinet reconsider their decision to close the residential care home facility at Newtown House in Stanhope, on the grounds of the geographical location and the lack of local alternative provision. Closure would violate the dignity of the elderly and cause severe hardship and suffering to both residents and their families.
Minutes:
In accordance with a Notice of Motion, it was Moved by Councillor A Savory, Seconded by Councillor R Bell:
This Council requests that the Cabinet reconsider their decision to close the residential care home facility at Newtown House in Stanhope, on the grounds of the geographical location and the lack of local alternative provision. Closure would violate the dignity of the elderly and cause severe hardship and suffering to both residents and their families.
In moving the motion, Councillor Savory commented that the strength of feeling was still so high amongst the people of Weardale and that Newtown Housedeserved special consideration given its excellent reputation and the significance, rural setting and its overall importance to Weardale.
Councillor Watson explained that there was a belief that Council’s existed for people and had a duty to the taxpayer and added that Newtown House appeared fairly critical to the well-being of people and critical to the economy in Weardale. Councillor Watson queried why the Council had invested £190,000 in Newtown House over the last three years, if it knew it was going to earmark the home for closure. Councillor Watson explained that there appeared much confusion about the decision being possibly flawed and informed the Council that above all, the process had to be transparent.
Councillor Stelling informed the Council that the ‘modernisation of care services for older people’ began in 2001. This had appeared to have escalated into a home closure programme. Councillor Stelling commended everyone who had made a compelling case to keep Newtown House open and felt that the Council owed a duty of care to provide a service in the Weardale area.
In seconding the motion, Councillor R Bell questioned the rural proofing aspect of the decision and asked the Council to treat the rural west area as they did other parts of the County. The decision meant that there was no adequate local provision and families would end up having to make a much longer round visits.
Councillor Richardson commented that his Electoral Division bordered Weardale and the decision to close Newtown House had caused a lot of anxiety in the immediate and surrounding area.
Councillor Temple explained that no-one was in doubt that the Cabinet had made a very difficult decision but added that it would be a more difficult decision for the Cabinet to give due consideration to the representations that had been made and carefully consider the situation again, which presented a special individual case.
Councillor Wilkes referred to a response provided to one of the questions that ‘local authorities should make all reasonable efforts to ensure care homes remain viable and stay open’ and felt that ‘reasonable’ in this instance essentially put the Council at risk and explained that the right and proper course of action would be to reconsider the Cabinet’s decision regarding the closure of Newtown House.
Councillor Napier explained that all decisions were looked at ‘in the round’ and affordability and sustainability. This applied to every single decision the Cabinet were being required to make in such austere times. Councillor Napier also referred to the future savings required by the Council in future years as outlined in the Leader’s report and given that the government appeared intent on continuing with public sector cuts, this would inevitably lead to the Council making more unpopular decisions.
Councillor Nicholls stated that the Cabinet report was not flawed and had been looked at through Scrutiny, in the correct and proper way. The decision was made by the Executive. Under such arrangements, executive decisions could not be taken by the full Council, therefore the decision had been made by Cabinet, which was subject to call-in, but had not been called in.
Councillor Nicholls also explained that it was one of the most difficult decisions he had been involved in since his election in 1981 and assured the Council that all of the matters raised in the motion were considered very carefully and nothing had changed since the decision had been made.
Councillor Hopgood clarified that the only issue discussed in Scrutiny was not the closure of the care homes, but the consultation process where around 94-96% of the consultation responses related to Newtown House.
A recorded vote was requested in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 16.4. The result of the vote was as follows:
For the motion (23)
Councillors A Bell, R Bell, J Charlton, D Freeman, D Hicks, A Hopgood N Martin, P May P Oliver, R Ormerod, G Richardson, J Rowlandson, A Savory, M Simmons, W Stelling, D Stoker, O Temple, K Thompson, A Watson, M Wilkes, A Willis, R Young and S Zair.
Against the motion (68)
Councillors E Adam, J Alvey, L Armstrong, A Batey, E Bell, J Bell, H Bennett, J Blakey, G Bleasdale, A Bonner, D Boyes, J Brown, C Carr, J Chaplow, J Clare, J Clark, P Conway, J Cordon, K Corrigan, R Crute, K Davidson, M Davinson, K Dearden, M Dixon, S Forster, N Foster, I Geldard, B Glass, B Graham, J Gray, O Gunn, S Guy, C Hampson, S Henig, K Henig, J Hillary, K Hopper, L Hovvels, O Johnson, A Laing, P Lawton, J Lee, J Lethbridge, R Lumsdon, L Marshall, J Measor, B Moir, A Napier, T Nearney, M Nicholls, H Nicholson, T Pemberton, M Plews, C Potts, L Pounder, J Robinson, K Shaw, T Smith, B Stephens, P Stradling, A Surtees, P Taylor, R Todd, E Tomlinson, J Turnbull, M Williams, C Wilson and S Wilson.
There were no abstentions.
The motion was lost.